IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20250 of 2010 BETWEEN D. Shyam and another. ... PETITIONERS AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. KISHORE DESHPANDE Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE 4The Court made the following order: ORDER: In this writ petition the petitioners seek directions by way of Mandamus to declare the action of the fourth respondent in taking steps to survey the land of the petitioners in an extent of Ac.0.07 ½ guntas covered by Sy.No.30 and Ac.0.08 guntas covered by Sy.No.31 of Shamshiguda village, Balangar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without issuing notice to the petitioners and affording any opportunity to them, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the absolute owners and possessors of land in an extent of Ac.0.07 ½ guntas in Sy.No.30 and Ac.0.08 guntas in Sy.No.31 of Shamshiguda village, Balanagar Mandal, having inherited the said property from their father by way of intestate succession. It is stated that originally the land in an extent of Ac.0.23 guntas in Sy.No.30 and Ac.0.23 guntas in Sy.No.31 was their ancestral property, which stood in the name of the their grandfather viz. D. Pochaiah and after the death of their grandfather, the aforesaid lands devolved upon their father by name D. Yellaiah and two of his brothers viz. D. Muthaiah and D. Mogulaiah. In the family partition between their father and his brothers, the aforesaid land admeasuring Ac.0.07 ½ guntas and Ac.0.08 guntas in Sy.Nos.30 and 31 respectively fell to the share of their father and they are in actual possession of the same. It is submitted that though the fifth respondent is not having any interest in the aforesaid land, based on the representation filed by him, the respondents are taking steps to survey the land. 3. Based on the written instructions submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, it is stated that one D. Gopal has submitted an application dated 02.11.2006 claiming succession with regard to land in Sy.No.31 from his father by name late Durgapally Laxmaiah. Based on the said application, the third respondent has requested the Assistant Director Survey & Land Records for demarcation of land in Sy.Nos.30 and 31. 4. Even as per the instructions obtained by the respondents, no notice was issued to the petitioners before taking up survey. It is the case of the petitioners that the fifth respondent is not having any interest in the matter and it is also not known as to on what basis, he filed an application claiming succession with regard to the rights over the land covered by Sy.No.31. As much as it is not in dispute that the petitioners are the owners and possessors in title of Ac.0.07 ½ guntas and Ac.0.08 guntas in Sy.Nos.30 and 31 respectively, no steps should have been taken for survey, without giving notice to the petitioners, merely on the representation filed by the fifth respondent. 5. As much as it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the survey is taken up based upon the representation of the fifth respondent without giving any notice to the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to direct the fourth respondent not to conduct any survey on the lands of the petitioners covered by Sy.Nos.30 and 31. However, it is made clear that if the fifth respondent is claiming any land in Sy.Nos.30 and 31, further steps shall be taken only after giving notice and affording an opportunity to the petitioners by fixing a date of hearing, till then no further steps shall be taken in the matter. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J August 24, 2010 Note: Furnish C.C. of the order by 27.08.2010. (B/o) DSK