IMPORTANT POINT
Surveying authorities can conduct surveys of private lands upon request, as long as no specific prohibition exists in the governing legislation.

ORDER :

Heard Smt.M.V.Ramana Kumari, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Ms.M.Nikitha, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu, learned Senior Counsel briefed by Sri V.Satyanarayana Prasad, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.5 and Sri K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

2. The reliefs sought in the present Writ Petition are as under:

“(a) Declaring the Notice/summons dated 25.06.2024 issued by the 4th respondent – Mandal Land Survey Officer, Nagayalanka Mandal, Krishna District, calling upon me to be present at the time of survey on 29.06.2024 at 10:00 A.M as without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India;

(b) Consequently, direct the respondents not to conduct survey in pursuance of the Notice/Summons dated 25.06.2024 issued under Section 23 of the A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923;

(c) grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The facts as submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner are that the Petitioner is the agricultural tenant of the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.5.18 cents in Sy.No.456, Nangegadda Village, Nagayalanka Mandal, Krishna District by paying rent to the Respondent No.5 – Temple in advance; that the Writ Petitioner secured the tenancy rights by way of auction undertaken by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments vide proceedings dated 30.07.2022; that the Petitioner has his own agricultural land just adjoining on the western side of the land belonging to the Respondent No.5 – Temple; the wife of the Petitioner is also the owner of the land on western side of the land belonging to the Respondent No.5 – Temple.

4. While so, the Respondent No.5 – Temple has submitted a requisition to the Tahsildar, Nagayalanka Mandal to conduct a survey; that, consequently, the Mandal Land Survey Officer (Respondent No.4) had issued Notice dated 25.06.2024 (impugned herein) under Section 23 of Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (the Act) by marking a copy to various neighbors including the Writ Petitioner informing that a survey is proposed to be conducted on 29.06.2024 at 10:00 A.M; that a direction was also given to produce title deeds relating to each person’s land at the time of survey, thereby making it clear that the surveyor would proceed ex-parte if anyone fails to attend; that the Writ Petitioner being the president of the Bar Association of Avanigadda requested the Respondent No.4 to provide some more time for obtaining copies of documents and also that on the scheduled date, the Writ Petitioner had to attend National Lok Adalat (i.e., on 29.06.2024).

5. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Writ Petitioner had subsequently learnt that the Founder Family Member of the Respondent No.5 – Temple had submitted a ‘Representation’ alleging that the bunds of the temple land in an extent of Ac.5.18 cents in Sy.No.456 of Nangegadda Village were removed thereby diminishing the extent due to alteration; that the survey was sought by the said Founder Family Member only to re-fix the boundaries by measuring the land of the Respondent No.5 – Temple and the land of the neighbors including that of the Writ Petitioner herein. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Impugned Notice is issued under Section 23 of Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 and that the Mandal Land Survey Officer has no jurisdiction to conduct survey of the private land by invoking the power under Section 23 of the Act. It is further urged that the conduct of survey in respect of private properties is governed by the Standing Orders of the Andhra Pradesh Board of Revenue.

6. Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu, learned Senior Counsel representing Respondent No.5 has drawn the attention of this Court to the Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondent No.5. The said Counter Affidavit was filed by none other than the Founder Family Member