B,Suresh Goud. v. The District Collector,

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO WP.No.34199 of 2017 ORDER:

Heard counsel for petitioners, the Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 & 2, and Sri K.Laxman, Assistant Solicitor General appearing for 3rd respondent. 2.

Petitioners' grievance is that they had applied to the 1st respondent on 27.03.2017 to cause survey and demarcate their land in survey No.153(old) 94(new) of Singayyapally village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, a portion of which was acquired by the 3rd respondent; similar requests had been made earlier and one such request dt.08.11.2012 was rejected by the 2nd respondent on the ground that some portion of the said land is under the control of the 3rd respondent; and therefore direction be given to the 1st respondent to consider the said representation in accordance with law.

3.

Sri K.Laxman, Assistant Solicitor General appearing for 3rd respondent states that a portion of the land in said survey number was in possession of the 3rd respondent ever since 1991, but he does not give any valid reason why the land of the petitioners cannot be demarcated from the land in the occupation of the 3rd respondent by the Survey Department attached to the office of the 1st respondent.

4.

The Government Pleader for Revenue also had no valid objection to the petitioner's representation. 5.

In this view of the matter, the 1st respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dt.27.03.2017 seeking demarcation of the land by the Officials of the Survey Department attached to his office and communicate his decision to the petitioners within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 7.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed.

_________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J 30th October, 2017.

gra