THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.23431 of 2010 DT.25.10.2010 Between: Bokka Narsimha Reddy and others. … Petitioners And Commissioner Survey Settlement and Land Records, Dist.Ranga Reddy and others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.R.Satyanarayan Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following ORDER: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare inaction of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in conducting survey of land admeasuring Acs.2.08 guntas comprised in Survey No.247/A of Turkayamjal, Kasmmaguda, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary. Though respondent Nos.3 and 4 are impleaded as parties to the writ petition, having regard to the nature of the grievance of the petitioners, it is not necessary to put them on notice. The petitioners claim that they are the owners of the above- noted land and that they have made an application on 03.05.2010 before the Mandal Surveyor with a request to him to survey the land and fix the boundaries as per records. Though the Mandal Surveyor issued notices to respondent Nos.3 and 4 and the neighbours of the petitioners’ land calling upon them to be present on 12.05.2010 at 9.30 am for survey and fixing the boundaries, respondent Nos.3 and 4, who received notices, failed to attend the survey. But, however, they have filed their objection petition requesting him not to conduct survey in view of the pendency of C.M.A.No.560 of 2009 in the Court of I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners plead that in the light of the said objection, the Deputy Collector has served a memo, dated 12.05.2010, informing that no survey will be conducted till the disposal of the above-mentioned case. The petitioners thereafter filed an application, dated 13.09.2010, before respondent No.1 with a request to conduct survey. As no action was taken on the said application, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that in view of the objection raised by respondent Nos.3 and 4, survey could not be conducted. In my opinion, this reason cannot be countenanced in law because under the provisions of the A.P. Survey & Boundaries Act, 1973 (for short ‘the Act’), the authority concerned is not prevented from conducting survey merely because third parties have raised an objection to such survey. The competent authority is entitled to conduct survey on putting notice on all the interested parties. It is of relevance to note that mere act of conduct of survey and fixing boundaries does not in any manner establish the right or title over the property in question in favour of any individual. This being so, there can be no conceivable objection for any party to survey and fixing of boundaries by the competent authority under the provisions of the Act. In this view of the matter, respondent No.2 is directed to conduct survey and fix boundaries over the above-noted land of the petitioners on their complying with the statutory requirements under the provisions of the Act, including payment of necessary fees. Respondent No.2 shall issue a notice to respondent Nos.3 and 4 before conducting such survey. It is made clear that the conduct of survey and fixing of boundaries by respondent No.2 does not in any manner confer any right on the petitioners over the land in question. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.29974 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) Date: 25.10.2010. VGB