N. Y. HANUMANTHAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court in WP No. 16232 of 1992, dated 30-10-1998. The appellants herein are the respondents and the respondents herein are the petitioners in the writ petition.

( 2 ) THE rank of the parties is described herein as in the writ petition.

( 3 ) A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are as follows :one G. Narayaiia Swamy was the owner of Ac. S. OO of land in S. No. 129/10 of Shaikpet village forming part of Banjara Hills of Hyderabad, who had purchased the same under a registered sale-deed dated 21-1-1966. The said Narayana Swamy was the husband of G. Padmavathi, the 1st petitioner herein. Petitioners 2 and 4 are his sons and petitioners 3 and 5 are his daughters. After purchasing the said land, G. Naryana Swamy put up a compound wall around the whole extent of Ac. 8. 00. He also put up small tentaments and a watchman s quarter in the said land. It contains Municipal number bearing 8-2-269/8/1. After the death of Narayanaswamy, the said land was devolved upon all the petitioners herein.

( 4 ) DURING his life time, late Narayana Swamy entered into an agreement of sale in respect of the said land in favour of a Cooperative House Building Society. He had also applied to the Government seeking exemption under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the "urban Land Ceiling Act". To get exemption he had to get the land mutated in his name. Accordingly he made an application to the authorities concerned. On his request, the Government in its proceedings No. D. Dis. No. D/5021/80, dated 10-10-1980 directed the District Collector, Hyderabad and other subordinate authorities to mutate the name of Narayana Swamy in respect of the said land in the revenue records so that it may enable Narayana Swamy to get exemption. The Tahsildar, Golconda, held an enquiry and passed an order on 29-10-1980 effecting mutation of the said land in the name of G. Narayana Swamy. While mutating, the Tahsildar found that S. No. 129/10 was merged and became part of newly formed S. No. 403. Accordingly mutation was effected in the revenue records as having formed part of new S. No. 403 of Shaikpet village. The effect of mutation was communicated to the Collector and also to the Government. However exemption sought under Section 20 was still under consideration. In the year 1981, the Government undertook survey under the Town Survey Act. New survey numbers were assigned in respect of the lands situated in Banjara Hills and other areas. According to the petitioners, no notice was given to them or their predecessor-in-title regarding conducting of town survey. On 15-4-1983, in the case of No. B. /1605/9183, the RDO without issuing notice to the petitioners cancelled the mutation ordered by the Tahsildar. The order of the RDO was challenged by the petitioners in WP No. 3322 of 1983. On merits the said writ petition was allowed quashing the order of the RDO and directing the authorities to hold fresh enquiry after giving notices to the petitioners. Pursuant to the said order, the RDO again passed an order dated 19-3-1987 cancelling the mutation order and attempted to demolish the building and even started giving instructions to the revenue authorities to build up records. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed WP No. 3954 of 1987. This Court by its order dated 27-9-1988 allowed the said writ petition quashing the order of the RDO dated 19-3-1987 and directed the Collector, Hyderabad to dispose of the petitioners appeal keeping in mind the observation made by the Court. This Court in its order further observed that all the proceedings that were initiated under the provisions of the Land Encroachment Act were set at naught. It was also observed that the petitioners are in possession of the said land. The Court restrained the authorities not to interfere with the petitione