THE HON’BLE SRIJUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.30048 of 1998 Dated 14.03.2007 Between: Mandadi Venkatram Reddy S/o Buchi Reddy and others. … PETITIONERS And: The District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda and others. … RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRIJUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.30048 of 1998 ORDER: Petitioners are the owners of the land admeasuring Acs.14.39 gts in Sy.No.467 of Charlapally village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District, by virtue of purchase by their ancestors 50 years prior to filing of the writ petition, and since then the petitioners’ family has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. Originally, in the year 1951-52, the then Assistant Director, Survey and land records, conducted shetwar with respect to Charlapally village of Nalgonda Mandal, and shown the extent of the said survey number as Acs.11.36 gts. However, on physical possession, the petitioners noticed that the said survey number consists of Acs.14.39 gts. In that regard, they submitted a representation to the third respondent for re-measurement of the said survey number, whereupon, the third respondent conducted survey and fixed the boundaries. Accordingly, the details of survey was published in supplementary shetwar of Cherlapalli village of Nalgonda District on 17.01.1998 and objections from the neighbouring land owners were called for. Thereafter, after considering the objections, the third respondent published a supplementary shetwar stating that the said land consists of total extent of Acs.14.39 gts. Consequent to that the petitioners made representations to respondents 2 and 4 to make necessary corrections in the revenue records, in vain. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition is filed. Despite service of notice, the respondents have not chosen to file any counter. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. A perusal of the record shows that by letter dated 28.02.1998, the third respondent made settlement correction in Sy.No.467 and the same was sent to the fourth respondent for implementation of the same in the revenue records. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the fourth respondent is under obligation to bring the required amendments in the revenue records. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the fourth respondent is hereby directed to make required corrections as per the letter dated 28.02.1998 addressed by the third respondent, if the same is not already done. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 14.03.2007 sh