THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.26588 of 2010 Date: 13.12.2010 Between: Kanuganti Raja Kumari ..... Petitioner AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for respondent No.5: -- The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare Memo Lr.B/2113/2009, dated 5-5-2010 of respondent No.3 refusing to survey the land of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, she is the owner of the land admeasuring 886 sq. yards, in Plot Nos.136, 137 and 138, comprised in Sy.Nos.391/A and 395 of Venkatapouram, Alwal Municipality, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same for valuable consideration through registered document No.171/02 on 24-1-2002, from one G.Yadagiri, GPA holder of Shaga Ramaiah, the original owner of the land. As a tin shed was existing in the said land, door No.1-23-180/26/90 was also given to the said property. When the petitioner intended to construct a house therein, respondent No.4 came to the land and claimed that the said land of the petitioner is not in S.No.391/A but the same belongs to him. The petitioner gave a representation to respondent No.3 on 2-9-2009 to demarcate S.No.391/A. However, respondent No.3 dodged the survey and demarcation on one reason or the other and finally issued the impugned Memo refusing demarcation of the petitioner’s land on the ground that neighbouring pattedars filed objection petition stating that the petitioner is not the pattedar of the land in question. The facts noted above would show that there is a dispute regarding the title of the property. Mere survey of the land and demarcation of the boundaries would not confer any right or title on any party. However, on the facts of these cases, the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 are not attracted and in strict legal sense the petitioner does not have an enforceable right to compel the revenue authorities to survey the land and demarcate the boundaries unless the provisions of Sections 5 to 13 of the said Act are satisfied. In ordinary course, the revenue authorities are obliging the parties to survey the land. But as noted above, in the absence of a statutory right vested in a party, he cannot compel the revenue officials to survey more so when they face constraints having regard to the objections raised by the adversary parties. If the petitioner feels the necessity of getting the survey and demarcation of the land in question conducted, the appropriate course open to her is to approach the competent civil court for appropriate relief against her adversaries. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of these writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.33957 of 2010 is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date : 13-12-2010 AM