regard to inaction of the respondents therein in trying to demolish the boundary wall constructed around her subject land as illegal and arbitrary; in the said writ petition, she had also sought a consequential direction to the respondents to conduct survey and demarcate her land. During the course of hearing in the above said writ petition, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submitted that the land in Survey Nos.337 to 346 is a Government land and that survey is taken up to get evicted the persons, who are in occupation of the Government land, and that the petitioner herein approached the Court and filed the above said writ petition even before the survey was completed and merely on apprehensions. This Court dismissed the said writ petition on the ground that the said writ petition is filed only on apprehensions. The petitioner once again made applications, dated 29.03.2010 and 22.06.2010, requesting for demarcation of her land, but till now the Revenue authorities have not conducted survey. However, without conducting survey, the impugned memo was issued, inter alia, stating that the 5th respondent submitted a representation stating that the adjacent owners of land in Survey No.337 of Kukatpally are encroaching upon the land in Survey No.336 of Kukatpally Village and that on that the Mandal Surveyor enquired into the matter, but survey could not be conducted, as the land in Survey No.336 is covered by structures; but, however, the Assistant Director, Survey & Land Records, Ranga Reddy District, 4th respondent herein, is being addressed for demarcation of the land to resolve the issue and that in that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed not to take up any constructions in the disputed land till the issue is settled. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed.’
