AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Writ Petition No.23747 of 2020 is filed questioning the notice, dated 15.12.2020, issued by respondent No.4 intimating the petitioners and others that a survey would be conducted on 18.12.2020 at 10:30 A.M. for the lands situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 by the Deputy Inspector of Survey and the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Mahabubabad.
A co-ordinate Bench of this Court granted interim stay of operation of the impugned notice, by an order, dated 30.12.2020, seeking vacation of the said interim stay. Respondent Nos.6 and 7 filed counter affidavit on 29.01.2021 along with vacate petition, and at that stage, the father of respondent No.6 filed Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021 to declare the inaction of the respondents in conducting survey in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 of Shanigapuram Village, Mahabubabad Mandal and District, even after issuing notice to conduct survey, as illegal and arbitrary.
The said Writ Petition was originally disposed of by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, by an order, dated 05.11.2021, directing the respondents therein to complete the survey of the subject lands pursuant to the notice already issued by them within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. The petitioners herein filed a review application being Review I.A.No.3 of 2021, while seeking leave to file the said review and the said review application was allowed and the Writ Petition was restored on to the file of this Court by recalling the order, dated 05.11.2021. Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions are listed before this Court, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status in Writ Petition No.23747 of 2020.
Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 claims to be the absolute owners and possessors of various extents of land situated in Sy.Nos.278, 279, 281 and 280 of Shanigapuram Village, Mahabubabad Mandal and District, having purchased the same under various registered sale deeds during the years 2007 to 2011. The impugned notice was issued proposing to conduct survey of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 of Shanigapuram Village, Mahabubabad Mandal and District, at the instance of respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein. The said notice was questioned on the ground that there were successive surveys already conducted by the authorities concerned and reports are also available in that regard and as such there is no necessity to conduct survey once again. Another ground on which the impugned notice is challenged is that respondent Nos.6 and 7 have no land in Sy.Nos.278 and 279 and they are not in possession of any piece of land in the said survey numbers. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein along with the petitioner in Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021, have earlier filed various civil suits vide O.S.Nos.190 of 2012, 54 of 2013, and 20 of 2013 and the said suits were dismissed by the concerned Courts in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.275, 276 and 279 and repeated complaints were also lodged before the Telangana State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (for short 'the Commission') and also before the Lokayukta and in the said proceedings, the reports were submitted by respondent No.2 stating that respondent Nos.6 and 7 are not in possession of land in the said survey numbers. It is also contended that the civil suits vide O.S.Nos.30 of 2020 and 67 of 2020, were filed on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad, seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.278 and 279, admeasuring Acs.8.01 gts., and Acs.5.38 gts., respectively and the said suits are pending for adjudication. Thus, it is contended that the dispute is already ceased of by competent Civil Court in respect of the land situated in Sy.Nos.278 and 279. Any action on the part of the respondent authorities in proposing to conduct survey in respect of the lands, which are not in possession of respondent Nos.6 and 7, is not permissible under law. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also drawn the attention of this Court to the reports submitted by the District Collector to the Lokayukta as well as to the Commission and also certain findings recorded by the competent Civil Court while dismissing the suits filed in respect of the subject property by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021 and others.
On the other hand, Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 and 7, submitted that the impugned notice came to be issued by considering the fact that there is a contradiction in the reports submitted by the Mandal Surveyor on the previous occasions and by considering the said fact, the Revenue Divisional Officer-Mahabubabad (for short 'RDO'), having considered the report of the Tahsildar-Mahabubabad, dated 23.10.2020, stating that the survey reports submitted by the Mandal Surveyor at different point of time are contradictory to each other through letter bearing Rc.No.E/1361/2020, dated 13.11.2020 and directed the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records and the Deputy Inspector of Survey, Mahabubabad, to conduct survey of 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 the actual boundaries of the said survey numbers and also to identify the persons who are in possession of the subject lands. It is also contended that in order to take appropriate steps seeking recovery of possession of the lands being claimed by respondent Nos.6 and 7 and other family members, conducting of survey is very much essential.
Insofar as survey of the land situated in Sy.No.275 of Shanigapuram Vilalge is concerned, the petitioners cannot have any objection as they are not claiming any right, title or interest in the land situated in Sy.No.275. The petitioners are not claiming any right in respect of the land situated in Sy.No.275. Therefore, the petitioners have no locus also to question the notice insofar as the land situated in Sy.No.275 is concerned. Insofar as the survey of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.278 and 279 is concerned, the petitioner in Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021, who is the father of respondent No.6 herein along with some others has already filed civil suits vide O.S.Nos.30 of 2020 and 67 of 2020, seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession against the petitioners herein and the said suits are pending for adjudication.
From a perusal of the copies of the plaint and affidavit filed in the said suits, it is evident that respondent Nos.6 and 7 and the petitioner in Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021, are not in possession of the said lands. The said suits were filed in the Month of February and June, 2020. From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that respondent No.2 herein through his letter, dated 29.09.2020, requested the RDO to conduct an enquiry on the representation submitted by respondent No.6 and others to the Commission and to submit a report to enable respondent No.2 to submit a report to the Commission. It is in response thereto, the RDO after having called for a report from the Tahsildar-Mahabubabad, addressed a letter, dated 13.11.2020, to respondent No.5 requesting to conduct a survey for submitting a report. The relevant portion from the said letter reads as under:-
“In this regards Tahsildar Mahabubabad vide reference 2nd cited as submitted that the contention of the petitioner alleging that their forefather lands have been encroached situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 total to an extent of Ac (14.37) gts of Shanigapuram Village of Mahabubabad Mandal by Sri Jannapureddy Pramod Reddy could not be arrived to a decision, based on the contradict reports of physical possession of the then Mandal Surveyor, Mahabubabad and present Mandal Surveyor, Mahabubabad, could not arrive to the conclusion.
Further the Tahsildar as requested to referee the case the superior officer above Mandal Surveyor i.e., Deputy Inspector of Survey / AD, S&LR, Mahabubabad in order to submit the report to the Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Hyderabad at the earliest.
In this regards Deputy Inspector of Survey / AD, S&LR, Mahabubabad is requested to conduct on the fore side Sy.Nos. and submit the detailed report immediately”
It is pursuant to the said letter, the impugned notice came to be issued but not on any application submitted by respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein. There is a specific reference to the said letter, dated 13.11.2020 of the Tahsildar, in the impugned notice and a copy of the said letter, dated 13.11.2020, is placed on record. In addition to the same, a report of the Tahsildar-Mahabubabad, bearing Rc.No.B/600/2020, dated 28.10.2020, is also filed along with counter affidavit of respondent Nos.6 and 7, wherein a conclusion is recorded to the effect that there is a contradiction in the reports submitted by the Mandal Surveyor with regard to the physical possession over the lands in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279, admeasuring Acs.14.37 gts,. The said conclusion reads as under:-
“The contention of the petitioner alleging that their forefather lands have been encroached situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 total to an extent of Ac (14.37) gts of Shanigapuram Village of Mahabubabad Mandal by Sri Jannapureddy Pramod Reddy could not be arrived to a decision, based on the contradict reports of physical possession of the then Mandal Surveyor, Mahabubabad and present Mandal Surveyor, Mahabubabad, could not arrive to the conclusion, as such, submitted report to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad to referee the case the superior officer i.e., Deputy Inspector of Survey / AD, S&LR, Mahabubabad in order to submit the report to the Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Hyderabad at the earliest.”
From the said letter of the RDO, dated 13.11.2020, and the report of the Tahsildar-Mahabubabad, dated 28.10.2020, it is evident that the reports of the Mandal Surveyor submitted earlier are contradictory to each other. The contents of the letter, dated 13.11.2020 of the RDO and the contents of the letter, dated 28.10.2020, of the Tahsildar-Mahabubabad, are not disputed or contested by the petitioners. As already noted above, there is a specific reference made in the impugned notice to the letter of the RDO, dated 13.11.2020.
From the impugned notice, it is also evident that the survey proposed to be conducted is by the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Mahabubabad, but not by the Mandal Surveyor as contended. The Mandal Surveyor only issued notice intimating the parties concerned that the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records is going to conduct survey. Impugned survey is sought to be conducted for the purpose of submitting a report to the Commission on a complaint made by respondent No.6 and others. If such a survey is sought to be conducted on an application made by respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein or at the instance of the petitioner in Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021, the consideration for this Court may be different as civil suits were already filed for declaration of title and recovery of possession, as already noted hereinabove. But that is not the case on hand.
By conducting survey of the entire lands situated in Sy.Nos.275, 278 and 279 of Shanigapuram Village, Mahabubabad Mandal and District and fixing boundaries thereon would not cause any prejudice to any of the parties except to aid in ascertaining the persons in possession of the land covered by the said survey numbers which would enable the parties concerned to take appropriate steps in accordance with law and also for taking further steps on the complaint made by respondent Nos.6 and 7 before the Commission. The survey that is proposed to be conducted, under no circumstances can result in dispossessing any person from the land in said survey numbers or put of any persons in possession who are out of possession in the said survey numbers. Therefore, proposed survey cannot be said to cause any prejudice to any of the parties except making the factual possession clear. Even otherwise, if any party is aggrieved by the report drawn pursuant to the proposed survey or any of the finding recorded therein, it is always open for such aggrieved parties to take appropriate steps against such report, either by filing appeal or otherwise.
In the light of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice, dated 15.12.2020, and the Writ Petition is accordingly, dismissed. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are at liberty to take further steps pursuant to the impugned notice.
As a consequence, Writ Petition No.27671 of 2021 is disposed of directing respondent No.5 to take steps for conducting survey in furtherance of the notice, dated 15.12.2020, and conclude the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any in this Writ Petitions, shall stand closed. No costs.