IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.7412 of 2000 Between: D.Sailu, S/o Late Rajaiah, R/o 2-9-60/B/2, Mudfort, Secunderabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Special Commissioner & Director of Survey Settlement & Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Gaganvihar, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Director, Survey & Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.7412 of 2000 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside Memo No.B2/136/2000 dated 14.03.2000 of respondent No.2 by declaring the same as illegal, void and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923. The petitioner sought for a consequential relief to demarcate and fix the boundaries in respect of Survey No.170/2 of Tokkatta Village, Tirumalagiri Mandal, Hyderabad District. Heard Sri C.Raghu, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. In the impugned order passed by respondent No.2, the request of the petitioner for surveying the above mentioned land was rejected on two grounds namely, (1) that the Tippan in respect of Survey No.170/2 of Tokkatta Village is not available in his office and (2) that the said survey number was also not indicated in the copy of the village map available in his office. He further concluded that in the absence of Tippan for the said Survey number, demarcation of the boundaries of Survey No.170/2 cannot be taken. In paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is stated as under. “The initial Survey of this village was conducted in 1311 Fasli under A.P. Telangana Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli. According to the initial Survey, Sy.No.37 with an extent of Ac.1382.21 Gts is recorded as poramboke land. Subsequently Sy.No.37 was sub- divided into 3 sub-divisions i.e., 37/1, 2 and 3. The Revision survey of this village was conducted in 1356 Fasli under the provisions of A.P. (Telangana area) Land Revenue Act 1317 Fasli. During the revision survey, the said old Sy.No.37/1 is correlated to Survey No.170 and Sy.Nos.37/2 and 3 are correlated to Survey No.171. The entry in Sethwar of 1356 Fasli shows that the extent of this Sy.No.170 was originally recorded as Ac.351.16 Gts and described as Potekharab i.e., uncultivable land and Tellary Bazar. Subsequently, the said entry in respect of the area was rounded of and recorded as Ac.343-29 Gts. Sub-division number 170/2 was recorded below the above entry with an area of Ac.7-27 Gts and the name of one Sri Asha Balaiah is recorded. But the said correction is not attested by any competent authority and as such it is un-authenticated. No reasons nor references are recorded for creation of the said sub- division No.170/2.” Though the learned counsel for the petitioner made efforts to convince this Court, that the reasons put forth by respondent No.2 and the averments contained in the above reproduced para are not correct, exercising the writ jurisdiction, I am not inclined to go into these disputed questions of fact, which are required to be determined on the strength of the evidence adduced by both the parties regarding the existence or otherwise of Survey No.170/2. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate relief. _______________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 11th July 2008 RRB