The High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the Respondents in not giving the exact measurements of the rand surveyed on 13.08.200g though the boundaries are fixed in respect of the rand admeasuring Ac.9-13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.2B and29 part, corresponding to Sy Nos: j29i50 D_3, D_4, D_5 and D_ 6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, owned and possessed by the petitioner, in spite of repeated requests and rep resentations, AS arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to raw, viorative of Fundamentar and constitutionar Rights guaranteed under the constitution of rndia and consequenfly direct the 4th respondent to furnish copy of the survey sketch of the land admeasuring Ac.g_13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.28 and 29 part, corresponding to Sy_Nos.129/50 D_3, D_4, D_ 1 I I I L 'I l 5 and D-6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, owned and possessed by the petitioner, along with exact measurements showing petitioner,s land, as per the survey held on 13.08.2008 and if the same is not possible, direct the respondents to conduct a fresh sLrrvey of the aforesaid land belonging to petitioner and furnish survey sketch along with exact measurements of his land, forthwith. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 15.1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent to furnish sketch/plan with measurements in respect qf the land admeasuring Ac.9-13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.2B and 29 part, corresponding to Sy Nos.129/50 D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad as per the survey held on 13.08.2008, if not possible, direct him to conduct a fresh survey, pending disposal of the above Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.MUNEENDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITI ON No.32337 of2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the lollowing reliel "....fo issue an appropiate ttrit, order or direction, more particularlg one in the nature i7 writ o7 Mandqmus declaing the action of the Respondents in not giuing the exott measurements of the lond surueyed on'13.O8.20O8 though the boundartes are fixed in respect of the Land admeasuing Ac.g-13 Guntas, situated in ?.S.1Vos.2B and 29 Part, conespondiig to Sy.Nos.129/50 D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6, of Shaikpet Villagi, Hgdirabad, owred and possessed bg the petitioner, in spite of ,.p"it"d requests and representations, as arbitrary, iltegal, unjust' contrary to law, uiolatiue of Fundametttal and Constitutionat Rights guaraieed under the Constitution of India and consequentlA direct the -4th respondent to fumish copg of the surueV sketch of the tan.d adrneasuing Ac.9-13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.2B and 29 Parl' conesponding to SA.Nos.129/50 D-3, D'4, D-5 ctnd D6' of Shaikpet VitlagL, Hgdirabad, ouned and possessed bA the petttioner, along Luith *.otrr"^ents showlng petitioner's land, as per the surueg held on "*oit 13.08.2008 and if the same is not possible, direct tte respondents to conduct a fresh surueg of the aforesatd land belonging to pe'titioner and fumish sirueg sketch along u)ith exact measurements of his land' forthtuttlt^. .."

2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record

3. It is statid. that the petitioner and his late father- Ch.Ayodhya, entered into an Agreement of Sale dated 21.01.1974 with Mr.Ahmed Abdul Waheed, S/o. Syed Abdul Aziz, for purchase of land admeasuring Ac. 12-35 guntas in Survey Nos.129/5O-D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6 situated at Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad and in I I 2 pursuance of the same, possession of the land was handed over. It further statcd that even after receipt of sale consideration, when the vendor failed to execute registered Sale Deed, the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No. 1241 of 1999 on the file of XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 2 1.01 . 1924 and the .same was decreed on OT.O5.1999. It is also stated that when the vendor failed to comply with the decree, the petitioner filed E.p.No. 126 of 1999, and the executing Court registered a Sale Deed dated 17.O4.2OOO in favour of the petitioner, conveying the subject land, vide document bearing No.p.99/2OOU. It is further stated that the respondent No.2 had filed E.A.No.242 ol 2OOO in the E.p claiming that the subject land is Government land and the same was dismissed for non_prosecution, twice i.e, on o9-or.2oo1 and again oo 29.06.2010, and thereafter, no further steps were taken. It is stated that the judgment and decree passecl in O.S.No. 1241 of 7999 attained finality, and the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land, which is private land. It is further that when disputes arose with the neighbouring owners, a comprehensive survey was conducted the responcrent No.4 and a report with sketch dated r3.0g.20og submitted without exact measurements. It is the case of the oner that though the Sale Deed pertains to land admeasuring -35 Guntas but only Ac.9_13 Guntas is found on ground as I I -) I per the said survey. It is further case of the petitioner that he submitted a representation dated 3O.O9.2O23 to the respondent No.9, requesting to direct the surveyor to fix boundary measurements as per the survey done by the respondent No'4 but no acLion was taken and therefore, he submitted another representation dated. 02.11.2O23 to the respondent No'4, requesting to furnish a copy of the survey sketch showing exact measurements of the land admeasuring Ac.9- 13 Guntas in T'S.Nos.28 and 29 Part, corresponding to Sy.Nos.129/50 D-3 to D-6 of Shaikpet Vil1age, or alternativeiy to conduct a fresh survey and furnish a sketch with measurements. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after receipt of the said applications, ti1l date, no action has been taken by the respondents.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No'3, inter alia stating that as per the letter of the respondent No'4 dated

05.08.2008, Sy.Nos. 129l50 D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6, claimed by the petitioner, do not exist in the official records or in the Jubilee Hil1s Sufrkhas Mubarak layout. It is also stated that Sy-No' 129/85 does not exist in the survey records and denied the alleged survey held on 13.08.2008 and uitimately prayed to dismiss the writ petition' 4

5. In view of the above, and as the grievance of the petitioner is limited to the non_consideration of his representation dated 02.11.2023, rhis Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ pel ition by directing t he respondents to consider the said representation. If no survey has been conducted, the respondents shall pass a reasoned order on the petitioner,s representation in accordarce with law and communicate the same to him to enable him to pursue appropriate remedies, in accordance with law. 6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending. if any, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// SD/-K. SREE RAMA MU HY DEPIJTY REGIS RAR SECTION O FICER Revenue Department, Secretariat Buirdings, state or / ' +:E|J'J;ffl,r*...:ffiy 2. The District Cotlector, Hyderabad District. 3. The Tahsildar, Shaikpet Mandal, Hyderabad District. 4. The Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Lakdi_ka_pul. Hyderabad 5 One CC to SRt A.TVUNEENDHAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Tetangana District.

7. Two CD Copies. BSK BS w I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:1 51041"2025 El"rE, e. I () 1 $E ST4r{ 2s APtt 2fl2q A Dr ,,tf .S../ i a-- ORDER WP.No.32337 af 2023 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS t ? , I 1-i ,,- t I l I