THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6477 of 2011 Dated 28th March, 2011 Between: Vinukonda Srinivasa Rao …Petitioner And The Throvagunta Gram Panchayat and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Madhava Rao Nalluri Counsel for respondent No.1: Sri Raju, learned counsel representing Sri G. Elisha, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayats Counsel for respondent No.2: Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Sri K. Madhava Reddy, standing counsel for APSRTC Counsel for respondent No.3: -- The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 in taking steps to demolish the compound wall of the petitioner’s house situated in survey No.343 of Throvagunta Village on the ground that the same is situated in survey No.342 belonging to respondent No.1 Gram Panchayat as illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, the property owned by him admeasuring Ac.0.07 ½ cents is situated in survey No.343 of Throvagunta Village. He has constructed a house with RCC roof in or around the year 2002 and been living in the said house since then. His grievance is that in the guise of formation of road, respondent Nos.1 and 3 have been encroaching upon his land in survey No.343, made marking on the compound wall of his house and started digging trenches for construction of drain. The petitioner further stated that he has no objection for construction of drains or for formation of existing road with gravel or otherwise, but in the guise of executing those works, the respondents cannot encroach upon his land in survey No.343 for construction of drains. The petitioner also alleged that the respondents have permitted the owners of the houses situated on the opposite row to encroach upon Gram Panchayat property and constructing steps while seeking to remove the structures raised by the petitioner on his private land. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.1, wherein it is inter alia stated that under the Special Component Works undertaken with NREGS funds, Rs.10,00,000/- was sanctioned for formation of internal roads including canals and drainage works in Throvagunta Village. That administrative sanction was granted by the District Collector on 22.03.2010 for execution of the said works and that following the said sanction, the works had been commenced. It is further stated that the respondents are constructing drains in survey No.342 and taking steps to demolish the compound wall of the petitioner’s house in the said survey number and that the width of the road is about 19 feet. It is further stated that the Village Revenue Officer has surveyed the land before the work of construction of drainage canals was commenced and that according to the said survey, the petitioner has encroached upon the land in survey No.342, where there is existing service road. That it was further revealed that at the place where the petitioner’s house is situated, the width of the road is only 16 feet indicating that the petitioner has encroached upon the public land. At the hearing, Sri N.Madhava Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, has strenuously submitted that the petitioner has only constructed a few steps over the public land and that the compound wall constructed by him falls in survey No.343 and not in survey No.342. He questioned the claim of the respondents that the survey was done by the Village Revenue Officer by stating that it is only the Mandal Surveyor who is competent to conduct such survey and not the Village Revenue Officer. Since the disputed questions of fact are involved, it is not appropriate for this Court to adjudicate upon the same, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The parties are at serious issue regarding the question whether the petitioner has encroached upon Gram Panchayat land or not and that whether the compound wall raised by the petitioner falls in the survey No.343 or 342. The best way to resolve this dispute in my opinion is to get the survey conducted by the competent authority. It is not in dispute that the Mandal Surveyor is technically and legally competent to conduct such survey. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to get the survey conducted through the Mandal Surveyor of Ongole Mandal in the presence of the petitioner. If during the survey, it is found that the petitioner has encroached upon survey No.342, a copy of survey report shall be served on the petitioner along with notice, and on receipt of the explanation, if any, from the petitioner, respondent No.1 shall take appropriate decision and communicate the same to the petitioner. The decision of respondent No.1 shall be subject to, however, the legal remedies that may be available to the petitioner. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.8073 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th March, 2011 GHN