and remove the timber until the boundary of the property of Peechi Irrigation Project was fixed. As the respondents did not either permit the petitioner to remove the logs or to demarcate the boundary, even after a long time, petitioner approached this court filing WP(C) No.11554/2008, which was disposed of by Ext.P6 judgment directing the respondents to complete the survey of the properties under the respondents. Thereafter, a report of the Taluk Surveyor along with Ext.P9 sketch was forwarded to him as per letter dated 9.7.2008. As per Ext.P10 letter the Taluk Surveyor informed the Tahsildar that there was certain Puramboke lands in Sy.Nos.67/3 and 874/2. The petitioner submits that he was originally shown another sketch which is marked as Ext.P11, in which there was no puramboke as marked in Ext.P10 and the trees were found to be cut from his own property as per Ext.P11. But as per Ext.P10, the property from which trees were cut was marked as Puramboke. Immediately, thereafter the petitioner received Ext.P7 letter dated 19.8.2008 and Ext.P8 order dated 18.9.2008 of the Assistant Executive Engineer directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.700/- for cutting and removing the trees from the Government puramboke land near Idathukara main canal under the Peechi Irrigation Project. Petitioner filed this writ petition at that stage.
