IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.22821 of 2014 BETWEEN Cheepu Mallikarjuna Rao AND ... PETITIONER The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of the lands to an extent of Ac.0-53 cents in R.S.No.106/1, Ac.0-22½ cents in R.S.No.106/2, Ac.0-30 cents in R.S.No.106/3 and Ac.2-96 cents in survey No.106/4 situated at Maddimuthanagudem Village, Chintalapudi Mandal, West Godavari District. Petitioner claims that the aforesaid lands were assigned to his father in the year 1968 and mutated in the name of his father. It is stated that since his father executed a Will, dated 26.10.2010, in favour of petitioner, his mother, and sister-in-law, they are cultivating the said lands. Subsequently, after executing a registered partition document No.2538/12 the aforesaid lands are said to have been fallen to the petitioner’s share. Petitioner, however, submits that on account of the dispute with the neighbouring ryots, the boundary stones of his lands were removed. Hence, the petitioner made an application, dated 10.12.2013, to the Tahsidlar, respondent No.3, seeking for survey and for fixing boundary stones in his lands, by paying necessary fee by way of challan. Though respondent No.3 has proposed to conduct survey, the same is being postponed. Alleging inaction, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned Government Pleader has received instructions from respondent No.3, which state that the Mandal Surveyor and the Village Revenue Officer were already deputed for the survey work and they found that the measurements of the lands possessed by the petitioner are not available with the Government, as there are no details in the Field Measurement Book (FMB). The FMB available only refers to sub-divisions to an extent of Ac.0-53 cents for sub-division No.1, Ac.1-69 cents for sub-division No.2, Ac.2-30 cents for sub-division No.3 and Ac.2-96 cents for sub-division No.4. It is, therefore, stated by respondent No.3 that petitioner has to apply for the sub-division work in the extent proposed for preparation of new FMB for the required sub-divisions. However, petitioner having not applied for the sub-division, the survey work was held up.
4. In view of the said factual position, it will be necessary for the petitioner to apply for sub-division by paying necessary fee, so as to enable respondent No.3 to complete the survey.
5. Writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to apply for sub-division, in accordance with law, and approach respondent No.3 for completion of survey work. Respondent No.3 shall thereupon complete the necessary work relating to the sub-division and survey the lands, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date the petitioner approaches for sub-division, as permitted above.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 17, 2014 LMV