IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9104 of 2005 Between: Kammari Balram S/o. Lingaiah, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy, Taluq, Nizamabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1The District Collector, Nizamabad . 2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kamareddy,Nizamaba. 3The Asst. Director of Survey and Settlement Land Records, Nizamaba District. 4The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kamareddy,Nizamaba. 5A.Bhoomlingam, S/o. Rajlingam, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy Taluq, Nizamabad District. 6A.Ramulu, S/o. A.Bhoomalingam, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy Taluq, Nizamabad District. 7A.Narender, S/o. A.Bhoomalingam, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy Taluq, Nizamabad District. 8A.Mehender, S/o. A.Bhoomalingam, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy Taluq, Nizamabad District. 9Smt. A.Manikyamma, W/o. A.Bhoomalingam, R/o. Adloor Yellareddy Village, Kamareddy Taluq, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.ASHOK ANAND KUMAR Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent Nos.5 to 9: MR. K.GOVARDHAN REDDY FOR MR. C.R.PRATAP REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in conducting resurvey of the property in respect of patta, dated 20.05.1985 granted to respondent Nos.6 to 9 and the consequential action of the said respondents in taking illegal possession of the land on the purported survey, as illegal and arbitrary. This case has a chequered career. For the purpose of disposal of this case, all the facts relating to several rounds of litigation need not be mentioned. It would suﬃce, if it is stated that after a long drawn battle, the petitioner was put in possession of land admeasuring Acs.4.02 guntas, which was assigned in his favour on 20.05.1985 after recovering possession from respondent Nos.6 to 9 by the Court bailiﬀ in pursuance of order passed in E.P.No.4 of 1993 in O.S.No.8 of 1975 on the ﬁle of Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad. The grievance of the petitioner is that after physical possession of the land admeasuring Acs.3.26 guntas in Survey No.601/2 of Adloor Yellareddy Village, was delivered to him on 29.04.2004, respondent Nos.6 to 9 approached respondent No.3, got a resurvey done and in pursuance of the purported resurvey, they reoccupied the said land delivered to him. The petitioner has not ﬁled the purported proceeding of respondent No.3, whereby he is stated to have conducted resurvey. By the mere resurvey conducted by respondent No.3, respondent Nos.6 to 9 would not have been entitled to dispossess the petitioner without taking recourse to appropriate legal proceedings to recover possession from the petitioner. If on the basis of the alleged resurvey conducted by respondent No.3, respondent Nos.6 to 9 forcibly taken possession of the land, such an action cannot be countenanced as lawful. The remedy for the petitioner against such an illegal action would be to approach the appropriate Court for recovery of possession. Therefore, the present writ petition ﬁled questioning the alleged resurvey and seeking declaration of the alleged illegal possession of respondent Nos.6 to 9 is wholly misconceived. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to claim recovery of possession of the property, if he was unlawfully dispossessed by respondent Nos.6 to 9 on the basis of the purported resurvey conducted by respondent No.3. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, interim order, dated 08.06.2005 is vacated and WPMP.No.11984 of 2005 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 29th AUGUST, 2008. kvni