The High Court · 2025

2. The District Collector, SirJdipet District. 3. The Director of Survey, District Land Survey and Records, Office at 4. The inspector of Survey, District Land Survey and Records, Office at 5. The Mandal Surveyor, Komaravelly Mandal, Siddipet District. 6. The Tahsildar, Komaravelli Mandal, Siddipet District. 7. Kaitha Srinivas Reddy, S/o. Kaitha Bal Reddy, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Agriculture, Ri/o. Plot No.H.No.7{S, Ainapur Village, Komuravelli Mandal, Siddipet District. 8. Kaitha Srinath Reddy, S/o. Kaitha Bal Reddy, Aged about 38 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Ptot No.H.No.7-65, Ainapur Village, Komuravelli Mandal, Siddipet District. L Syed Rouf Madni, S/o. Syed Ghouse Badan, Aged about 65 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. H.No.9-4-1351D117, Vali Colony, 7 Tombs Road, Shaikpet, Khatija Masjid' Golkonda' Hyderabad' ...RESpoNDENT'/RESpoNDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to SUSPEND the impugned Notices bearing No.Bl677l2O24, 8167812024 in Flle No.A3/595/2024, dated 18.11.2024 for conducting Survey of land in Sy.No.304 and 27O situal.ed r. Ainapur village, Komaravelly Mandal. Si:Jdipet District, pending disposal cf l're above Writ Appeal. Counsel for the Ap,gx:llant: SRI B.CHANDRASEN REODY, SENIOFt COUNSEL FOR SRI B.VAMSHIDHAR REDDY Counsel for ther Res pondent Nos.1 TO 6: SRt KATRAM MURAL.IDHAR REDDY' GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for ther Res,pondent Nos.7 TO 9: SRI ANANTH N,AGESW\R RAO The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HOI{'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT APPEAL No.22L of 2o25 JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble Smt. Justice Renuka Yara) Heard Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned Senior Counscl representing Sri B. Vamshidhar Reddy, learned counsel lbr the appellant; Sri Katram Muralidhar Reddy, learned Governmcnt Pleadcr lor Revenue, for respondent Nos.1 to 6 a-r-rd liri l'arsil Ananth Nagesr.r'ar Rao. learned counsel for respondetrt Nos.7 to 9.

2. This is an lntra-Court appeal preferred b1 rirc appellant / '"r'rit petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 06.O I .-20-2') passed bl er lear,red Single Judge in W.P.No-133496 of .2'l-l+. wherebv, a clirection '"vas issued to respondenl. authoritics tr process the application submitted bv respondent Nos.i':L:1; seeking to (rorrduct sr.rrvey of lands in Sy.l'{os.27o and .lO+ irr Ainapur Vitlage, Kornaravelly Mandal, Siddipet District. Facts of the case:

3. Tlre a1:rlieli;rnt lii=d W.P"No.33496 rt[ 2O24 1-o declat-r' thr' action of rerslto't<lt';r' l'i...'.6 ln issuing impugned uotices; i-r,';rriirr:, ) \i!..N ,.221of2025 No.Bl6'i'i /.>-)2,1, Bl67a/2O24 in File No.A3l595r2)24, dated

78.7 7.',a:t2.:. 1ct' conducting survey of land in S1..Nos.304 arrd 2ZO, situatec i: I r\:napur Village, Komaravelly Martrlal , Siddipet District, :rs ll,.qirl and consequcntly to set aside. tht salte.

4. T't e appellar-rt and his wife are the ov,,ners and possessor:J ti ,:qricultural lands to an extent oi Ac 1.25 gts., in Sr,.No.3O6t 1 'I . .{c.3.l6 grs., in Sy.No.3O6/R, A,:. 1.1:i2 gts., in Sy.No.3O6/ ) r\c.2.OO grs., in Sv No.3O6lE, Ac.O.02 gts., in Sy.No.3()7/ \ A<:.3 00 q1s.. ir.r Sv No.307,/D, Ac.l,1B gts., in Sv.No.3(r7l,i .q..0.25 grs., in S-i. No.3O7/H 12, A<:.). g gts., in Sy.No.3(,13i.t, i-,.J, tor-al arirneasuring Ac. 14.24 gtr;. s ituated at Ainapui Vt ta,,',e. Komuravell-r. l"4anclal, Siddir:et I)istrict. The saicl lan<is i :., i' lrr.c, purchasecl u.der sal, Ce,:cls in the r.ear 2OC.I r\ :1,{. illsiilnce of r(.st)onclent No.;,. tlre r,tspondent Nos.4 ilr,l : rs,:,ucrl notices clatcri 11.O7.2024 and 3).Og.2O24 propos;rr I rr, ( ri:rlucr sirr,..r:r ol' l.ln(ls in Sr..Nos.1170 and 3O4, situatei ,!1 r'.t ll)L{r Villaqe- Aggrrevecl t}\, the satne, t}re appellant has rais,'r1 '1ior:; r. iric lt:ltc'r tllrted 2.2.O'7.2C2q and also l)('Irf i.lrr viric W.i,.No.26127 o[ ,_1fi24 Io set aside 'I'iris Lloulr vide r.rrcler ciaterl 21.09.12O2._ directed . .l j, j () hereil) to consicle r tl.re obir.< ticns dated preferrr,il .r .r ; , 'arious D ontir I I the said r r r,rr i .,1 WANo.221 of m25

22.07.2Cl24 and conduct survey strictly in accordance with law by serving notices on all the interested parties.

5. In the interim, respondent Nos.7 and 8 criminally trespassed into the appellant's property and caused damage of property worth Rs.2,50,OOO/-. In tJlat regard, on the complaint lodged by the appellant, the police registered an FIR against respondent No.S for the olfences under Sections 329(3), 32a(5) r/w 3(5) BNS. The appellant protected his land by erecting cement plate u,all. Even then, when respondent Nos'7 and 8 are threatening to r,'u ithclraw the criminal case and are making continuous efforts to grab the appellant's property, tJre appellant and his wite hlecl the suit vide O.S.No.SOL of 2024 on the frle of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Siddipet seeking perpetual injunction against respondent Nos.7 and 8. Before frling of the said suit, respoucient No.7 fited the suit vide O'S'No'474 of 2024 against the appellant anci his wife seeking perpetual injunction with respect to l:rnd in S1'-No.3O4 lBll to an extent of Ac'O' 18 gts., land in Sy'.1-o.270l G I 1 / | l 1 to an extent of Ac'O'11 gts' and Iand in Sv.No.3O4i I to an extent of Ac.O.1O gts', situated at Ainapur Viltage. Komuravellt Mandal, Siddipet District' 4 \\'.\.lio. 121 of 2025 6 I)urr;r irr-rt to the order dated 21-O9.2O24 in \[ .P No.26127 of 2024 llas'.( (l bv this Court, respondent Nos.5' an,l (> ssued the impugrecl no ic:es dated 18.1 I.2O24 for conducttng th€ survey of lands in Sir .'i ;-s.304 and 27O, n'hich are as [ollo'r's: C0\,.:-nmcnL (,, -l clilngi,na ()llice of Tehsll(lar, Kc,m Llr.avclt I lr4;rlrda I.rnt Srddipcra Drstri(:t File No A:l/:;',i,,/2O'24 ltl67al2024 W.l' No 26l.l7 oi 102'1 dr t1.11.2024 .SLI It\1EY N U,i,ICLJ Sl,rlJ I l [,ancl mr':ts,L:t|rnr:nts iixrng ol horrrln.rrcrs' ;rtidrt,ct dtlrlrict, koLnuravelli mandalam. Al illitl)ur vrlllgc SY N')s :,0 |, 2 70 to fix the bound;rn bv lhc rnandarl strvcrlu\{)r ' rfg Itrf Applicariorl iitecl b} Karrha Srtrntiir,as l?cddt. S/rr Fzll laeddy With regald ro tl.: .l)oLa stlbi.r.L rnJtlcr- thrs rs lr) trtlo.m rou ll'at lrc ',1i I1d tl Suruyeor will fix the (ldLc .(' , ',):'.12 2024 mr)fntnf{ rt l() 00 3n, l()r condlict nq ol srtrv, y by hxing up the bor"ur,iar,:' r,f thc larrrl in S\.Nos. :10+. l7O srlrrirl.(l irl jl\irr,rpt r r,ill Lge, hence, on the sajd rlitlt I-o , ofacrrr(:.1 pall('(iirr and .urr(,r rrilrrLl,. rr;tttr'rltrr Illi -\ kirdlY appear along wilh rele,'r r. i,r'unrettts lr 1r ' thc samc is i'1 i'( r rl,r: abovt ,-,llri('r's ilrr'arvlrrxlv r,;r:tlLrt r lht' s-,lutr (,' ih: land and 'Lrri,l and tlr's:rmc ts tnforrnc,:l I.) 'h(',rLtLhrtlrt! 1,,'li)a | 'he iurvcv sd/- h.,rr,rr;. r'r li, .f. nd rI Surveyor - rr rlip :t:r District Copy to Manclal Gir'<l:;re ,,rl.irravtllr ii).rl,i)i.iron rhr.rlxrtt rl;rii' .rIrng \ rr r pahani cop; Kayithi Sflnr',as ti,. rl\ s('n Lr! Urrl r,rcldr th( .rl)i)ir( rLfi Sycd Ravoo ii4:r L . .i)r oi (ll uus,.rrlrl r. SyedAlthal11.d. r -r,n of(ihousurkl n I!,IanJa RaJarirh . r,r rf \rrr-saralr Telkapalli ljlarl( r r (:ktiti S.rr-rna sou ,)l \aisrirlrr.rir Telkapalli L'rlii.,\' t: - Chandr'.is(,khiu Sarrn.t Kallem Gan:sl lJ:r ) ; -.)r ol i{ r!,rskr Ltrr.r Sunkari N.r ..i: ? :r 'i: lirpLrl.r Cl-iI )(irir i, 1: ,, lt';,r l' Muthyama lti.la 'i I 'i, (;. L,, r;'t.r r, i I iif, s(!ll 1, Iiomuravellr Jir' Anebeyln.r ll.ril i' ', \.1 ,,f. .Ienahm : ril. r Ll . , ,1 I1. ,,r: l, ii. 1.,r, cr,"oiia\r I ,- ,ii<,, .,rl ' 5 \t(',tNo.221 of 2025 Mergu Pegondaswamv son o[ Balarah Mat;him;b Mutharah. son t'l laxmaiah Anneboyina Poshaiah' son of Yellaiah (iovernment oI Telangana Office of Tahsildar' Komuravelli Mandalam Siddrpeta District File No. A3/595/2o21 81677 l2O)4 wPNo' 26127 ot 2024 dL 1A'll 2024 SU RVt,]Y No,TICE SUB.IECT: Land mezrsurcmcnrs lixrng of boudnareis- slddiPct-district' komuravelli rnand:rlam, Ayrnapur village Sy Nos 3O4' 27O to fix the b()unda11 l)l the mandal suvenuyor - reg APplicaiion liled bv S. 1cd Rough Madani' son of Ghousebadan Re t: With regard to the .Ibovc sutrlect mattcr' thls is Lo lnform you that' the Mandal SunYeor witl fix the date i,e., 02.12.20:'l tt'";tt'ng ar ltl ou am lor conducting of survey by fixing JO',i? U"r"alr,". ot rhc tand ,n i,,..1,,r tU4. .';0 srruated ar Ayrnapur village, hence' on the said dare, rhe coLrccr nc.t paitco,,r rrrcl sufiounding pattedar may kindly appear along wrth relcvant docrtments lnfuturcLht'aboveoilicclsarcarrlbodyconductthesurvcyolthelandand the same is in the court and lhc sanre rs in&rrmecl to thc authoriry before the survey' sd/ Komuravelli Mandal Suryeyor SiddiPeta District Copy to ".lia^f Ci.aor". kolnu r avellr ir ) r ppcdr lrlr i h( :rt)ove datc along with Dahani copt byed narool m"d"nr s.rr {'t ( 'h"rr\' lrrrl'i'rn iltk p,,lt ch",ld.nckhrrlr sar.rn'L' st'n o[ \ersrnrar:rh Yerolla Srinivas. sc,rl o1 \lrlLalri_r Kallem Ganesh, son ol li'rmilkr rshrr'r Erpula Chandrarah S I \c-r'ri Kavithi Srinvras T, rl'rr "'"r "' ll'ri r"l't' Svcd Alrhrf Mr.l"nr -"rr "l { 'lr'" rrrr'lrr' Pittala Kan u ko r,rh. sor, ,,1 \lirllrr,,h Janagam Sl rkanth. \('rl "i'Eii"'rl'rl' Mergu Pegond:rsuJm\ s"rr"l ll'rl r rlr Patchimadla Muth.l r.ii I qr In I rl I-;r trn;r :ll ll Anebovina Posharr'rh. s/(r \'litli'It'rh Tekafalli kcla, \t Lla (ri (.ir^n(lI as''klraI Sirr rnir Manja Rajaiah, son (rl NiLIsal'rtl Mania Kanakar.',1r. \i'rr 'rl rr.rl\'rl':h Muryam Antarah. s"n "t I rxrn'rrh I(oniuravelli Shivakunrar' sorr ol I(rq'1Lalr Annabovlna Mall;Lr;rh -orr oi \ rll'rrIh Sunkari Nalsrrrgi,r l<'ri' si'rr"f i'rrrk:rsh Md. Atzatl Pashir. sotr ol ilusrn'rrr {lt ') ? I * I E 6 \\:\.No.221 of 2025 :'t nriucted on Cou r1 vrde order filetl present b rt directed the

7. '-1rr'2pp6llsn1 is aggrieverl by the afc.r--sitiri srs1y"., notices as rerspo"ril:nt No.S_The Mandal Surveyor, Kon ara,,elly Mandal, Siddipet .l istrict clid aot pass a detailcd o..clci- r.eI::rring to the objecti,:n s cated 22.02.2a24 as clirectecl by this datecl in ,\ .Og.2O24 in W.p.No.26 127 of 2O.t:+. appelltnt 1c attend the srrrvev propostril 1 __ ir,. 02.12.2-O2,+ Assailing the said notic(,s. hrr W.P.Nc.33.t)6 of 2024. The learned Srngle . r 111 ,, sttits fi r:cl b ,, thg 1g5r..tivc parties ancl th.r. rc lf e s (. I ta tlon s made for conduct itrg survev prior to the firing cr. -Lri , ;;rrits having fulfillecl ;lil tlr.: requirements of c.ir-cular. instrrr. rrlrr; rs:.,tieci by the ConmissiorLlr.. had clispo5q.i ol. the sairl \\ rit i),,r,ti.;r_r on the l-)remtse lhr; t lnere cor-rdllcting of sLlr,,,r,l. cl(.,r.:j I (.t . .. rr li'r 2ny 1i11g or o$,net.lsi,i1t ltor does it take arrva-r, ri;1hrs oi Llt, ir;,r_:tr_r; i: is helrl th 1 ttle survev ls 1t.a1t lor fi.\_;1 , rr,ithoul r.i.fer-1i.19 to the intea se rlispr rte:r br:1,.r.t,r , Ilr p 111iss 2116 therefore dir:e <.ted the l_esponden l ;tt thorii ils r .r i.r ; r 1l1 ct survey b-V issuinfl lto.lces to all inlere-strr! I-rirr.ries ;trril .ll:; r r.r;nsidering tl-reir obje,_-tron s, IIence, the u,rit appcill. r,:lbrring the l..r rrrtdaries l,-urther, Iii

8. _qt?_E_t q! ! t! oqs_qtth_q -pgt epp e l1a qt : I-,carrrrt I Sei,rior,- Courrse! 1_or ti:r.;1il1-l1.11;ii-: 1;;r. 11,,,1 that the 7 WA.No.221 of 2025 order passed by the learned Single Judge is erroneous as the objections raised by the rrvrit appellant vide letter dated

22.07 .2024 have not been taken into consideration by respondent Nos.5 and 6 and the impugned notices rvere issued in violation of the orders of this Cotrrt dated 2l .O9.'2O21 in W-P.No.26127 of

2024. Further, it is alguecl tirat respondent Nos.7 and 8 have sold their entire land and that there is no agricultural land available to them in Sy.Nos.3O4 and '27O t.'f Ainai;r-il Viiiage as said land is converted into plots and sokl to thir(l parties. lt is vehemently argued that conducting the survev is going to have arn adverse effect on the interest of tl-rt: appellant in O-S.l\io 5O1 of 2024 and tJrerefore, objected to conduct of sun.e-v anci prayed to set aside the impugned notices. The u'rit appeliar-rt reliecl upon judgment of a Division Benc,h of this Court rrr Akku La-:<man Rao vs' IDPL Employees Cooperative Housing Societyt. Contentions of resPondent Nos.7 to 9: g. The learned cottnset lor resprtnclt:nt Nos'7 to 9 supported the impugned order passerl bv the lezrrnett Single Judge alleging that the appellant cloes not ]rave iltt.\' interest in land in Sy.Nos.304 and. 27O ol Ainapur Village as t}-reir land is located in '2021 S(-('() l r r l\ i!/lil I 8 Wrt .n!o.221 of 2025 S,r,'.Nos,. lf.,(, / A/t, 306/B, 306/D, 306/E, 3O7 /A ic7 tD. 3O7 /c, 3O7/Il/2 arrd 3Oa/A/t/3 but not tn S).Nos. 10t and 2ZO Furthr:r. ,., is argued that the notices of respor.tcient Nos.4 and 5 rvere i s s u r:, I prior to the institution of sui t:r rn ().S.Noe.474 of 2024 and .-,( 1 of 2024. The respondents ar€lued th:t pendency of a civil srujr Joes not come in the conduct of surr <,r,. ln support re'.lxrndents relied upon judgment of e I)rr _sion 13.rr.6 o, p:rs r;r.d b.t, this this Co,.rrr ir W.A,No.lOgS of 2fl24 ancl order_s Court lV.F.l\los.327g5 of 2(,22 and 15666 ot 2Ct24. They lurther rejir:,rl on the orders passed bl, the Maclr:rs llrp:h Court in WMP (IIXD) Nas.IZ42O, tZ42L, 17422 of 2G2J arrd w.P.(MDl No.549I oI 2(t2g. thereof a .. t, ent P Iearne dGo DO ns of '-'ntio () rl1ue for res t Nos. 1to6 (--:onrt Itev I r., i, -ned Governmettt Pleacler rtrgcrl t Iii r f rs llo1l{'i,s ill-. iss;u6d pursuant to the ordei r,l \i,.i).irro..ti; l2.t <f 2024, d,ated 27.og.2024. leadt:r for n r p rrgned ( r,rurt in 1 l. (l tnsicered the arguments of learnecl Sr nici lis,11151,1 661 Ihr appr: lanr. learnecl Governmenl pleador. ,.). r ,\..( nrrt, for ir.spondcl..t1 N:r;. I to 6 arrd learned counsel for rlspc nrle.rt Nos.7 9 WA.No-221 of Z)25 to 9, perused the record and the citations relied upon by both the Iearned counsel. Analysis of the Court:

12. A perusal of the record, more particularly, the suits filed by the respective parties vide O.S.No.474 of 2024 filed by responder-rt No.7 and O.S.No.SO1 of 2024 hled by the writ appellant and his wife show that there is dispute about the location of the property on ground and both the counseis admit that there are boundary disputes. Both the parties are alleging interference on the part of another and have sought perpetual injunction by frling respective suits.

13. It is crucial to note that the appcllanl rs claiming lan<l in Sy.Nos.3O6, 307 and 308 of Ainapur Village, u heri:as respondent No.7 is claiming right and title over the lancl in Sr'.Nos'304 and 27O of Ainapur Village. At a qlancc, it ap1.rt'ars thal tlle rival parties are claiming rights over lancl in <lifti'r-t'nt sLrrve-y numbers' However, pleadings of the suits disclose thalt therc is a serious dispute about the identit,v' of their respective lalds on ground, due to which, the writ appellant got a crilniti:rl case registered against respondent No.8 allt:girrg iilegal Lrcsptrss arrld darnage to his property. Even belbre the pzrrties appr-oachcrl t:ivil court, l0 \i. 4. 'I<,.221 of 2025 I, responclei I No.7 had made an application tc re s ro,rrlent Nos.S and 6 '['lrt. 'l'ahsildar and the Mandal Survr:ror. ior conducting surve\ o1 l:r rd in Sy.Nos.3O4 arrd, 2ZO, pursuant t,r rr.lrich, '"\'ere i:;sr ,, .l altd said llotices W.P.No )itl'.) r- r_tf 2024. became illb- e,.l- matter ol- notices 1 '+ l'l-"; r)ourt disl-rosed of the said writ ,ei rri()n to conduct the sur''e' ir" considering the objections datec.r .22.oi..,.,o24 raised bv ihc i,r.rt :rplrellant and by issuing notices to all tlre concernecl, While sti. r-,'spondeni No.S_The Mandal Sur-r,ei.tr. rssuecl the rm1;lrqnr,l sr_r-,,r,y notices by complying one of thc drr.c,ion of this ('.rrlr i t f r: rl'r{r notices to all the personrj u-ho irr- or,.rrrng rand ,l ,|r,,i ,; i)- r ( .)I( i-i;:r.-l sy1y61, numbers i.e 3O4 ancl 27t). \,\'i h respect to st <-r,;rri rii|e. iron i.e., to give a detailed reasoi.ri:cl r rrler on the 1.iv;1 f i,-111.; ',r s.r:lj by the urrit appellant, the ir-rp.t:n .rl surt,ev rirti{.s (1:rr^ .S 11.2024 are bereft of reasons fcl irc rlljections .a().)4. The said notices h;rvt, ,r r:.lr rt__n<.e ol_ r:i 2024, but, does not give iirtr -t,i sons lbr 1re objections raised by the u.:.ir . rJrpr llzrnl for .i.. Ilorvever, said point has lost 1ltt, r ot ce of the i-r:1, ,ludge ald therefore, reiterat<,rl ihr. previous is Court in the orcier <i;ll eri -! I I t:i. 2O,2.I \ . l). \o. .' r i .1., rirs rr'.gari i :11 .',:r1;1,;r-1,,1,, q .i r;,)r .i 1 : ! i I I t l I I : u \VA.No,22l of 2025 W.P.No.26l27 of 2024 - In essence, in case, respondent Nos.5 and 6 proceed with survey without passing detailed order on the objections raised by the writ appellant, the sarre u,ould be a violation of this Court's order in W.p.No.26l 2Z of 2024.

15. The judgment of this Court in Akku Laxman Rao's case (1 Supraf relied upon by the appellant is relevant to the instant case to the extent that there is no surviving interest for respondent Nos.7 and 8 in Sy. Nos.3O4 and 2ZA as the-r. have allegedly sold the entire land to third parties by cor)verring inro plots. If so, locus standi of respondent Nos.7 ancl g seeking to conduct survey would be in question. Evcn so, since the order of this Court in W.P.No,26l27 of 2024 is not cheLliengt.cl :rnd h:rs attained finality, neither the issue of locus standi nor tlte issue of conducting the survey during the pendencv of civil suits can be revisited.

16. Among the decisions relied upon b-,1 the responcler.rt Nos.7 to 9, this Court is in conformitv with tl,re legal rat io lai<l r:lou r.r bt. this Court and the Madras High Court in reievanr r:iralions (supra) that pendency of litigation before Cor_rrts is not a bar lor the authorities to conduct survey or resurvev in the absenr:e of I I i i I I I I I i / I J To 12 \\ -i . lJr,.i 21 of 11025 an]' strl1'/ rr'' t,rrirn order/interim injunction from p roceeding further. ()on r;r'rluentlv. this Court is not quest.ionir g tl e vaiidity of implrg:,ed n,ltices merely on account of pen<ling :;uits but on accour-ri l,t- ':rrrrrc on the part of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in grassinu rr i, : : o: red order to the objections rzriserl b1 the writ appt:ilani. IIr: r.:r', the w,rit appeal has to be allowerl lry setting asirit' tlrr rrr',1;ugned notices bearing No.R,te77 /2024, 11 ./ ('ii3i ,.1 .: I r |'ile No.A3159512024, dated 18. 11.'rO2-4. i I- i'c'::.ult,, the writ appeal is erllov crl anci the irrt i-.11'g1.,, , i.:j jrrariirg No.B/677/2A24, Blt178,'rloti4 in File ).. r.t.,f, -i / :r: .', .1 r:lalcd 14.11..2024 issuecl br r'( snonclent .irllri.t';"1, - r t aslde lrr.1, M;scellaneous Petitions, l)elLc i1r I if anv, :.1:"r,i ;i .,1 /rrRuE copY/, t''*?,[+wttjaiR .E,lroNoJFFrcER ;ilit,Ii{i.i,{;ii#'*$ff fl}If,{#".*.'":"':^*'"*' . g:1","::"r::?i' 1'8,13i:'Siiirict Land Survev and Records" rn ce at i iltHi*:}ii $:itHffi {iipih4${'}* l .,,,nnun, ", r g'"t""tttt ,,[]'ollo*'* NAGES*AR RAo' Advocate tc PU( l 10 Two CD lr:r;l':s PSK- LS f'- I "-{ H|GH CO{.rR]' DATED:2914U2025 JUDGMENT WA.No.22t1 ot 2025 { c 1 ii) 11 ,\u\ I$,5 * QE s ",,, , ' ,'/ .t/ ALLOWING IHE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT'CC)STS \a ccp(e\ v-_ {r{=1r > t : i ! I , r E E .' i i t i i I I