IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17468 of 2010 Between: L. Kesavulu Naidu ..... Petitioner AND The Tahsildar, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K. Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondents : AGP for Revenue The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17468 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not conducting and demarcating the land to the extent of Ac.2.00 in Sy.No.11/2B2 of Akkarampalli Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Chittoor District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that an extent of Ac.2.00 in Sy.No.11/2B2/A2 of Akkarampalli Village was purchased by him for valuable consideration from the real owner under registered sale deed dated 31.10.1996, that as the disputes arose with the neighbouring land owners, with a view to resolve the problem, the petitioner made representation dated 22.02.2008 to respondent No.1 for survey and demarcation of the land. The grievance of the petitioner is that no steps have been taken by the respondents in this regard. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is inter alia stated as under. “In reply to the averments of the petitioner, it is submitted that the land in Sy.No.11/2B measuring Ac.166.10 of Akkarampalli Village is classified as patta dry land and stands in the names of Adem Chenchu Redy, M. Chinna Reddy, Adem Narayanamma, M. Thgambi Reddy, A. Ranga Reddy, P. Narayana Reddy as joint patta in the village accounts of Akkarampalli Village. The entire block was converted into so many house sites layouts. There is no enjoyment on ground by any of the patttedars/purchasers. Besides there is settlement dispute is pending before the Settlement Officer and Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad. The applicant is not in possession of the land to show possession which was actually purchased by the petitioner. The petitioner is requesting to demarcate the land as per the document. As per BSO 34-A read with para 20(a) survey boundary has to be pointed out in accordance with the measurements noted in the survey records. But in the instant case, the petitioner said to be purchased an extent of Ac.2.00 out of Ac.166.10. The land was not sub-divided and measurements were not noted in the survey records besides the petitioner is not in possession of the land said to be purchased.” In the light of the difficulty expressed by the respondents, it is not possible for this Court to direct them to undertake survey. If the petitioner has a dispute with his neighbouring land owners, the only course left to him is to approach a civil Court claiming appropriate relief. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.22047 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 08.12.2010 ES