High Court for State of TelanganaWP/26224/2007dismissed as infructuous

P. Sudhakar Reddy, v. The Assistant Director

2016-11-09A.Rajasheker Reddy3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26224 OF 2007 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not considering the application of the petitioner dated 16.10.2007 for survey and demarcation of Survey No.744, admeasuring Ac.19.25 guntas of Nadergul Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

The 1st respondent filed counter affidavit stating that after receipt application from the petitioner the 1st respondent entrusted the matter to the Inspector of Survey namely Sri Abdul Rawoof on 07.07.2008 to conduct survey and demarcate the land in survey No.744 as per Rules; that the said Inspector of Survey issued prior notices to the petitioners and also the adjoining land holders in Rc.No.A1/2059/09, dated 17.06.2009 fixing the date of survey as 21.06.2009; that accordingly the Inspector of Survey conducted the survey and also demarcated the land on filed on 21.06.2009; that a report to that effect has been submitted by the Inspector to the

1st respondent; that a Panchanama was also recorded by the Inspector of Survey on 21.06.2009 and thus the grievance of the petitioners have been fully complied with.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the survey has to be conducted by the 1st respondent instead of Subordinate of the 1st respondent.

On the other hand learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the survey was rightly conducted by the Inspector and if the petitioner has any grievance regarding survey, he has remedy against the same.

As far as survey is concerned, as per the counter affidavit the application of the petitioner was considered and survey was conducted by the Subordinate of the 1st respondent. With regard to the submission of petitioner that the survey has to be conducted only by the 1st respondent is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner has not brought to my notice any provision that the survey has to be conducted only by the 1st

respondent. Since the grievance of the petitioner stood redressed, nothing survives for adjudication in the writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructurous. However, if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to conducting of survey, he can avail the remedy against the same. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition, shall stand closed. ____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 09.11.2016 t k.