The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P7 proceedings of the second respondent by which he has been informed that it is not possible to permit him to construct a building in the property that is remaining, after surrendering a portion for the road. The reason stated in Ext.P7 is that, the boundaries of the road could not be ascertained. Therefore, he has been directed to have the boundaries ascertained and fixed. According to the counsel for the petitioner, as per Ext.P3 the boundary of his property has been fixed by the Taluk Surveyor. Therefore, what remains is only to ascertain the boundary of his property and to grant the permission that is being sought for. He has already submitted Ext.P11 representation which is pending before the second respondent. The petitioner seeks the issue of appropriate directions for the consideration of Ext.P11. 2. Adv.Azad Babu appears for the respondents.
3. Heard. Since it appears from Ext.P3 that the property of the petitioner has been measured by the Taluk Surveyor and W.P.(C).No.30956 of 2013 2 its boundaries ascertained, it is sufficient that the second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P11 in the light of Ext.P3. If the measurements in Ext.P3 are disputed by the second respondent, the said authority shall be at liberty to have the property measured again, with notice to him also by the Taluk Surveyor. The said exercise would have to be conducted and completed without undue delay.
This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P11 representation submitted by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P3 and if the same is not acceptable, to have the property measured at the instance of the Taluk Surveyor and to pass appropriate orders in the matter. The second respondent shall take necessary action expeditiously, and shall pass appropriate orders on Ext.P11, within an outer limit of two months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
rkc.