IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 20608 of 2008 Between: Movva Nageswara Rao S./o. Movva Kotaiah Vinukonda Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Guntur. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopeta, Guntur District. 3 The Mandal Revenue officer/Tahsildar Vinukonda Mandal, Guntur 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 or order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring inaction of the Respondent on petitioner representation dt. 7-9-2006 renewed of petitioner representation dt. 29-12-2007 is arbitrary illegal, capricious highhanded violation of Article 14, 21 & 300A of the Constitution of India apart of being in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play and is also in violation of the statutory duties conferred on authorities under Sections 8 and 9 of the A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act 1923 read with rule 7 of the rules made there under and consequently direct the respondents to ﬁx the boundaries of petitioner land in reference to the registered sale deed dt. 29-7-2005 and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAM KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of an extent of Acs.3.56 cents in survey No.82/2 situated at Perumallapalli Village, Vinukonda Mandal, Guntur District, which was purchased from his vendor under a registered sale deed, dated 29-7-2005. With a view to avoid controversy with the neighbours, he submitted representations on 08.06.2007 and 29.12.2007, to the Tahsildar, Vinukonda Mandal, the third respondent herein, to depute a Surveyor for ﬁxing the boundaries to the subject land, in vain. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of his repeated requests, the respondents have not acted upon his representations. Hence, the present Writ Petition. When the matter came up ‘for Admission’ on 22.09.2008, it was adjourned at the request of learned Government Pleader for Revenue to enable him to get instructions. On instructions, learned Government Pleader submits that the Writ Petition may be disposed of with a direction to the third respondent for expeditious disposal of the representations of the petitioner, for which, learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed. In the circumstances, the third respondent is directed to take necessary action and pass appropriate orders on the representations, dated 08.06.2007 and 29.12.2007, submitted by the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________ N.V.RAMANA,J Dated.23.09.2008 GJ