Point of law: A survey for fixing the boundaries of two villages had to be done under the provisions of Survey and Settlement Act by the Department of Survey Settlement and Land records. There was no power vested with Executive Engineer or Deputy Engineer or the Tahsildar of one Mandal to conduct such survey for fixing the boundaries of two villages

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed to quash the FIR No.298 of 2015 dated 22-7-2015 on the file of Karimnagar, I-Town Police Station, Karimnagar District registered for the offences under Section 447 IPC and Section 4 of A.P. Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 1982 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the proceedings No.CT/5611/2013 dated 8-10-2013 of the 7th respondent and proceedings No.N/3827/2013 dated 3-5-2013 and No. 3828/2013 dated -6-2013 of the 8th respondent and the possession certificate issued by the 9th respondent vide certificate No.B1/781/2015 dated 28-2-2015 apart from violative of Articles 14,19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

2. The petitioner filed an affidavit in support of the petition submitting that he purchased land admeasuring 726 Sq.yards in Sy.No. 959, Ramchandrapur colony (Rampur Locality), Karimnagar Town under a registered sale deed document No.4865 of 2012 dated 3-5-2012 from Sri Poladi Laxman and Sri Poladi Ravinder through their registered agreement of sale cum GPA holder Sri Ponnam Mondaiah. Similarly he purchased land admeasuring 711 Sq.yards in Sy. No 959, Ramchandrapur colony (Rampur Locality), Karimnagar Town under a registered sale deed document No.5553 of 2014 from M/s Sannihitha Chits Funds Pvt. Ltd. Both the lands were abutting each other. M/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited had issued a notification for establishment of a petrol pump in the said area and pursuant to the notification, he applied for the dealership and made an application to the 7th respondent seeking NOC for installation of the retail outlet in his land. The Collector forwarded his application to the 8th respondent for enquiry and for grant of permission to establish the MS & HSD retail outlet in his land. The 8th respondent vide letter No.K/13175/2012 dated 1-7-2013 informed the Collector stating that there was no objection to grant license in favour M/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. to establish MS & HSD retail outlet in Sy. No.959 situated at Rampur village, Karimnagr Mandal and District. The DRO and Addl. District Magistrate, Karimnagar District issued No Objection Certificate as required under Rule 144 of Petroleum Rules 2002 on the basis of the reports submitted by various statutory authorities vide certificate No.CT/5611/2012 dated 8-10-2013. The 9th respondent issued possession certificate bearing No.B1/781/2015 dated 28-2-2015 categorically stating that as per the office record, he was the owner and possessor of the lands in Sy.No 959 to an extent of 1437.10 Sq.yards situated at Karimnagar Town and Mandal and the said land was adjacent to Sircilla bypass road.

3. The petitioner further submitted that apart from the above permissions from the various authorities, he obtained permission from the Karimnagar Municipality for establishing the retail outlet by the petroleum company and there after started the construction work on his land. As per the procedure prescribed by the petroleum company he also executed and registered a lease deed dated 4-3-2015 in favour of the Petroleum company vide document No.2069 of 2015 before the Sub-Registrar Karimnagar. While, the construction was in progress, the persons inimical to him and to his uncle appeared to have made a false and frivolous representation to the 3rd respondent alleging that he encroached into the land of Hasnapur village of Karimnagar District which was acquired for the purpose of LMD Dam. Basing on the representations given by such persons, the 3rd respondent along with respondent Nos.5 and 9 conducted a joint inspection over lands bearing Sy. No 48, 49 and 50 of Hasnapur village and Sy.No 945, 955 to 959 of Karimnagar Town and fixed the boundaries of the two villages and in such inspection alleged that it was found that he encroached upon the land falling in Hasnapur Village.

4. The petitioner further submitted that no notice was issued by the 4th respondent, who was holding the post of the 3rd respondent and behind his back conducted the join