the lands situated in Sy.Nos.275,278 and 279, for the purpose of submitting the report to the Commission and it is pursuant to the said letter, impugned notice came to be issued. Thus, it is contended by Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Senior Counsel, that there is no sanctity for the survey that was conducted on earlier occasion and conducting of the survey pursuant to the impugned notice is very much necessary in order to ascertain thc acLual boundaries of the said survey numbers and also to iclcntrfr' thc persons who are in possession of the subject lands. lt is also contended that in order to take appropriatc steps seeking recovcry of possession of the lands being claime<1 by rcspondent Nos.6 and 7 and other family members, conducting ,,f sun er rs,, r'11 much essential. 7. Insofar as survey of the land situated in Sy.No.275 of Shanigapuram Vilalge is concerned, t1le petitioners cannot have ziny objection as they are not claiming any right, title or intcrest in the lancl situated in Sy.No.275. The petitioners are not claiming any right in respect of the land situated in Sy.No,275. Thcrcfore, the pelitioners havi no locus also to question the notice insolar trs lhe land situated in Sy.No.275 is conccrned. Insofar as the survey ol the lands situated in Sy.Nos.278 ancl 279 is concerncd, the petitioner in Writ Petition No.2767 | ot 202 1 , u'ho is t I'rc father of respondent No.6 herein along ',r,i th
