IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9025 of 2009 Between: Bokka Bala Krishna Reddy S/o. Late Vittal Reddy R/o. Kanaka Mamidi Village, Moinabad Mandal, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar Moinabad Mandal R.R. District. 2 The Mandal Surveyor Moinabad Mandal R.R. District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not taking any effective steps to demarcate the boundary stones of land in Sy.No. 359, admeasuring Ac. 1-33 guntas, situated at Kanaka Mamidi Village, Moinabad Mandal, R.R. District in File No.B/745/2008 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 and 300 (A) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to demarcate the boundary stones of land in Survey No.359, admeasuring Ac.1-33 guntas, situated at Kanaka Mamidi Village, Moinabad Mandal, R.R. District in File No. B/ 745 / 2008. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.BAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner submitted an application before the first respondent with a request to conduct survey and fix the boundaries of land admeasuring Ac.1.33 guntas in Survey No.359 of Kanaka Mamidi Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The application was processed and the matter was entrusted to the second respondent. Through memo, dated 28.06.2008, the second respondent proposed to conduct survey on 10.07.2008. The petitioner submits that ever since then, no steps were taken. He seeks appropriate directions in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. The first respondent acted promptly on an application submitted by the petitioner on 30.05.2008 for survey of the land referred to above. The second respondent also issued memo, dated 28.06.2008 not only to the petitioner but also to the owners of the neighbouring lands, proposing to conduct survey on 10.07.2008. Even if there was any obstacle for him to cause survey on that day, he ought to have resumed the work thereafter. There cannot be any justification to keep the matter of this nature pending indefinitely. It would amount to abdication of the duty endowed upon the respondents by the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to take necessary steps for completion of the survey, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 29th APRIL, 2009. kvni