Ch.Bhupal Goud Vs State of Telangana

Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the Respondents in not giving the exact measurements of the rand surveyed on 13.08.200g though the boundaries are fixed in respect of the rand admeasuring Ac.9-13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.2B and29 part, corresponding to Sy Nos: j29i50 D_3, D_4, D_5 and D_ 6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, owned and possessed by the petitioner, in spite of repeated requests and rep resentations, AS arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to raw, viorative of Fundamentar and constitutionar Rights guaranteed under the constitution of rndia and consequenfly direct the 4th respondent to furnish copy of the survey sketch of the land admeasuring Ac.g_13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.28 and 29 part, corresponding to Sy_Nos.129/50 D_3, D_4, D_

¶18

5 and D-6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, owned and possessed by the petitioner, along with exact measurements showing petitioner,s land, as per the survey held on 13.08.2008 and if the same is not possible, direct the respondents to conduct a fresh sLrrvey of the aforesaid land belonging to petitioner and furnish survey sketch along with exact measurements of his land, forthwith.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶20

Petition under Section 15.1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent to furnish sketch/plan with measurements in respect qf the land admeasuring Ac.9-13 Guntas, situated in T.S.Nos.2B and 29 part, corresponding to Sy Nos.129/50 D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6, of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad as per the survey held on 13.08.2008, if not possible, direct him to conduct a fresh survey, pending disposal of the above Writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI A.MUNEENDHAR REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

I

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR^REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITI ON No.32337 of2023

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition, under^{Article226 of the Constitutionof}

¶29

India, is filed seeking^{the lollowing reliel}

¶30

"....fo issue an appropiate ttrit,^{order or direction,moreparticularlgone} in the nature i7 writ o7^{Mandqmus declaingthe action of the} Respondents in not^{giuing the} exott^{measurementsof the londsurueyed} on'13.O8.20O8 though^{the boundartesare} fixed^{in respectof theLand} admeasuing Ac.g-13 Guntas,^{situated in ?.S.1Vos.2Band 29Part,} conespondiig to Sy.Nos.129/50^{D-3,D-4, D-5 and D-6,of Shaikpet} Villagi, Hgdirabad, owred and^{possessedbg the petitioner,in spiteof} ,.p"it"d requests and representations,^{as arbitrary, iltegal,unjust'} contrary to law, uiolatiue of^{FundametttalandConstitutionatRights} guaraieed under the Constitution of^{India andconsequentlAdirect the} -4th respondent to fumish copg of the surueV sketch of the tan.d adrneasuing Ac.9-13 Guntas,^{situated in T.S.Nos.2Band 29 Parl'} conesponding to^{SA.Nos.129/50D-3, D'4, D-5 ctnd D6' of Shaikpet} VitlagL, Hgdirabad, ouned^{and possessed bA the petttioner, along Luith} "oit.otrr"^ents showlngpetitioner's land,as per the surueg held on 13.08.2008 and if the same^{is notpossible, direct tte respondentsto} conduct a fresh surueg of the^{aforesatdland belonging to pe'titionerand} fumish^{siruegsketchalong u)ith exactmeasurementsof hisland'} forthtuttlt^.^.."

¶31

Considered the submissions of^{the learned counsel for the} respective parties and^{perused the record}

¶32

It is statid. that the^{petitioner and his late father-} Ch.Ayodhya, entered into an^{Agreementof Sale dated 21.01.1974} with Mr.Ahmed Abdul^{Waheed, S/o. Syed Abdul Aziz,for purchase} of land admeasuring^{Ac. 12-35 guntas in Survey Nos.129/5O-D-3,} D-4, D-5 and^{D-6 situatedat Shaikpet Village, Hyderabadand in}

¶33

2

¶34

pursuance of the same, possession of the land was handed over. It further statcd that even after receipt of sale consideration, when the vendor failed to execute registered Sale Deed, the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No. 1241 of 1999 on the file of XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 2 1.01 . 1924 and the .same was decreed on OT.O5.1999. It is also stated that when the vendor failed to comply with the decree, the petitioner filed E.p.No. 126 of 1999, and the executing Court registered a Sale Deed dated 17.O4.2OOO in favour of the petitioner, conveying the subject land, vide document bearing No.p.99/2OOU. It is further stated that the respondent No.2 had filed E.A.No.242 ol 2OOO in the E.p claiming that the subject land is Government land and the same was dismissed for non_prosecution, twice i.e, on o9-or.2oo1 and again oo 29.06.2010, and thereafter, no further steps were taken. It is stated that the judgment and decree passecl in O.S.No. 1241 of 7999 attained finality, and the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land, which is private land. It is further that when disputes arose with the neighbouring owners, a comprehensive survey was conducted the responcrent No.4 and a report with sketch dated r3.0g.20og submitted without exact measurements. It is the case of the oner that though the Sale Deed pertains to land admeasuring -35 Guntas but only Ac.9_13 Guntas is found on ground as

¶35

-)

¶36

per the said survey. It is further^{case of the petitioner that he} submitted a representation^{dated 3O.O9.2O23to the respondent} No.9, requesting to direct the^{surveyor to fixboundary} measurements as^{per the survey done by the respondent No'4 but} no acLion was taken and^{therefore,he submittedanother} representation dated.^{02.11.2O23 to the respondentNo'4, requesting} to furnish a copy of^{the surveysketch showingexactmeasurements} of the land admeasuring^{Ac.9- 13 Guntas in T'S.Nos.28 and 29 Part,} corresponding to Sy.Nos.129/50^{D-3 to D-6 of ShaikpetVil1age, or} alternativeiy to conduct^{a freshsurvey and furnisha sketchwith} measurements. The^{grievance of the petitioner is that even after} receipt of the said applications,^{ti1l date, no actionhas been taken} by the respondents.

¶37

A counter affidavit has^{been filed by the respondentNo'3,} inter alia stating that as^{per the letter of the respondent No'4 dated} 05.08.2008, Sy.Nos.^{129l50 D-3, D-4, D-5 and D-6, claimed by the} petitioner, do not exist in the official^{recordsor in the JubileeHil1s} Sufrkhas Mubarak layout. It is also^{stated that Sy-No' 129/85does} not exist in the survey records^{and denied the alleged survey held} on 13.08.2008 and uitimately^{prayed to dismiss the writ petition'}

¶38

4

¶39

In view of the above, and as the grievance of the petitioner is limited to the non_consideration of his representation dated 02.11.2023, rhis Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ pel ition by directing t he respondents to consider the said representation. If no survey has been conducted, the respondents shall pass a reasoned order on the petitioner,s representation in accordarce with law and communicate the same to him to enable him to pursue appropriate remedies, in accordance with law.

¶40