Allowed

Janupala Shekar Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 3 others

Telangana HC21 Feb 2022WP/9186/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justince B. Vijayseir Reddy disposed of Writ Petition No. 9186 of 2022 and S. O. 151 CPC petition by directing the Deputy Inspector of Survey to conduct survey and demarcation of the petitioner's land within two months. The court held the respondent's failure to act illegal and arbitrary.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 4 to conduct survey, demarcation and sub-division of subject land within two months from receipt of copy of order.

Janupala Shekar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 3… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH GOURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY, THE^{TWENTY FIRST DAYOF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND^ANDTWENryTWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE B.VIJAYSENREODY}

¶5

WRIT ITION 186 0F

¶6

Betwesn:

¶7

Januoala Shekar^{Reddy, S/o. Janupala Venkatram Reddy, Age31 Yrs'Occ:} iiiiilliirr". iI".^{t -io7i.'e jndetiaci''eaavitlage,Kulkacharla Mandal' Vikarabad} District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The State of^{Telangana, Represented by its Secretary Revenue Department'} Telangana Secretariat,^Hyderabad

¶11

2 The Asst Director,^{Survey and Land Records, VikarabadDist'}

¶12

¶13

Deputy lnspector^{o{ Survey, VikarabadDivision}

¶14

4 The Tahsildar,^{Kulkacharla Mandal, Vikarabad District'}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be pleased} to issue a Writ or^{order/s more particularlyone in the natureof Writ of Mandamus} declaring the action of^{the Rospondentsin not conducting surveyand demarcation} of the land of the^{Petitioner admeasuringA 3.18cts in Sy No' 72lA and72llBof} Bandelkacharla^{Village, Kulkacharla Mandal,vikarabad District,as beingillegal,} arbitrary and^{consequently direct the Respondentsto complelethe surveyand} clearly demarcate the^{land of the petitioner admeasuring A 3 18 Gts in Sy No 72lA} and 72 B of Bandelkacharla^{village,Kulkacharla Mandal, vikarabad districtand be} pleased

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Petition under Section^{'151CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the High Court may be pleased to issue} direction to Respondenls^{to Sub-divide, surveyanddemarcate the land ot the} Petitioner admeasuring A^{3.18Gts in sy.No.72lA and 72l/Bof Bandelkacharla}

¶19

¶20

Village, Kulkacharla Mandal, Vikarabad District, pending disposal of the Writ

¶21

Petition and be pleas, d

¶22

Counsel for the Petit ,ner : SRl. P. SHIVA REDDY

¶23

Counsel for the ResF rndents : AGP FOR REVENUE

¶24

The Court made the )llowing: ORDER

I I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B, VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.9186 of 2022

¶31

Petitioner submitted F-Line application dated 04,Og.2OZl vide Application No.AOD022100037544 and also submitted a representation to the respondent No.2 on 07.09.2021 for conducting survey and demarcation of the land admeasuring Ac.3.18 guntas in Sy.Nos.72lA and 72/B of Bandelkacharla Village, Kulkacharla Manda l, Vikarabad District.

¶32

It is the case of the petitioner that his father was the original owner pattadar of the subject land and the subject land was gifted to the petitioner. In order to crearry sub-divide and demarcate the land, the petitioner submitted application through F-Line on 11.06.2021. Since there was no response from the respondents, he submitted another F-Line application dated 04.O9.202t. However, the respondent No.4 has not acted upon the said application.

¶33

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue submitted that appropriate direction be issued to the respondent No.4 for conducting s u rvey.

¶34

¶35

4, In view of the above,^{the writ petition is disposed directing} the respondent No.4 to^{conduct survey, demarcation and sub-} division of the sL bject land^{pursuantto the F-Lineapplicat on dated} 04.Og.2O2l sub nitted by the^{petitionerby issuing noticeto all} concerned withi r a^period of two^{(2) months from the date of} receipt of a coP) of this order.

¶36

Pending riscellaneous^petitions, if^{any, shall stand closed.}

¶37

There shall be r ) order as to^costs.

¶38

/ffRUE COPY'

¶39

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶40

SECTION^OFFICER

¶41

¶42

'o',. rn"^{r.n",,oa,.qk1glf1p} IfBBl:Xlfl33i"1 B'J[i"q '.^{?,13 33Ji"tX ;Jt&'H*xud,ii't'n ci'J't'to'the'stateor reransanaat} Hyderabad. [C^JTI 4 Two CD CoPie^;

¶43

One^SPareCcrY TR BS

HIGH COURT

DATED:21l02 2022

ORDER

WP.No.9186 >t 2022

lHE
,. ile
//" t
A 7 Frp zopt

¶49

DISPOSING OF I'HE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COS'S

¶50

I I

Janupala Shekar Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janupala Shekar Reddy v. The State of Telangana and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salukuti Surender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Salukuti Surender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

T.Yadagiri Vs The State of Telangana

C. Nagender Vs State of Telangana

Sangu Goverdhan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

K.Dinesh Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others