08.03.2010 itself that the title on the third respondent as well as the location of site including the boundaries as offered at the time of applying as well as found at the time of verification for the purpose of issuance of No Objection Certificate does not undergo any change. It is also clear from the further report of the Tahsildar, Banaganapalli, to the District Collector, Kurnool, dated 24.05.2010 that the boundaries are tallying with the documents and on physical features. It is also mentioned that the petitioner validly purchased Ac.0.50 cents under registered sale deed dated 25.08.2009 by entering Survey No.142/1 in the document. Based on the said report, No Objection Certificate may be issued mentioning Survey No.142/3, but the fact remains that the Corporation, after selection of the third respondent, in fact sought for No Objection from the Collector, Kurnool also for Survey No.142/1. Thus, even if there is a minor discrepancy in the sub-number, it is evident that the land offered by the third respondent, the land evaluated and selected does not undergo any change and as such there is hardly any case of misrepresentation, fraud or mistake made out by the petitioner. The norms followed and evaluation of land from the standpoint of suitability and selection of such applicant and giving Letter of Intent, cannot be interdicted in this writ petition.
