Point of Law: A perusal of Circulars relied on by learned Government Pleader for Revenue goes to show that subject to compliance of conditions in Circulars, survey can be undertaken.

JUDGMENT :

SHAMEEM AKTHER, J.

1. Since the facts of the case and the issue involved in both these writ appeals are similar and since both these writ appeals arise out of a common order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, both these writ appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Both these appeals are filed challenging the common order, dated 10.02.2020, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. Nos. 39279 of 2017 and 6761 of 2018.

3. We have heard the submissions of Sri. Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for the appellant in both the appeals: Sri. B. Venkateshwara Rao, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 in W.A. No. 400 of 2020; Sri. R. Sushanth Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No. 8 in W.A. No. 400 of 2020 and respondent No. 9 in W.A. No. 407 of 2020; learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for official respondent Nos. 2 to 7 in W.A. No. 400 of 2020 and official respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in W.A. No. 407 of 2020; Sri. B. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 in W.A. No. 407 of 2020 and Sri. Vivek Jain, learned counsel for respondent No. 8 in W.A. No. 407 of 2020. We have perused the record.

4. The sole appellant in both these appeals (A. Laxman Rao) is the respondent No. 6 in W.P. No. 39729 of 2017 and respondent No. 7 in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018. Respondent No. 1 in W.A. No. 400 of 2020 is the sole petitioner in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in W.A. No. 407 of 2020 are the petitioners in W.P. No. 39279 of 2017. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in W.P. No. 39279 of 2017 are respondent Nos. 22 and 17 respectively in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018. Sole petitioner in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018 is respondent No. 5 in W.P. No. 39279 of 2017. Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in W.P. No. 39279 of 2017 are respondent Nos. 7 and 8 in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018. The issue in both the writ petitions in which the impugned common order was passed is conducting survey and proposing to undertake demarcation of land in Survey Nos. 160 and 161 of Hydernagar Village of Kukatpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. For clarity, the parties would be hereinafter referred to as per their array in W.P. No. 39279 of 2017.

Brief facts of W.P. No. 39279 of 2017:

5. In this writ petition, there are three petitioners. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 claim to be absolute owners and possessors of house bearing No. 16-2-100/35, plot Nos. 35 and 878 situated at The Gopal Nagar Co-operative House Building Society Limited, Hydernagar Village, GHMC Kukatpally Circle, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under registered sale-deeds. Petitioner No. 3 is the developer of Plot Nos. 192 and 193 situated in the aforesaid Society. These plots form part of layout made on land in Sy. Nos. 148 to 155 of Hydernagar Village. Petitioners trace history of flow of title. According to the petitioners, respondent No. 6 (appellant in both the writ appeals) made an application, dated 24.05.2014, to the Commissioner, Survey Settlements and Land Records, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’) for comprehensive survey of lands in Survey Nos. 148, 149, 159, 160, 161 and 162 and to re-fix the correct boundaries of his land in Survey No. 160 of Hydernagar Village, stating that there is lot of difference in boundaries shown in Survey Nos. 160 and 161. On the said application, the Commissioner endorsed directing the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records (hereinafter referred to as ‘RDD’) to conduct survey of Survey Nos. 160 and 161 of Hydernagar Village. Based on the said endorsement, survey was conducted without serving notice to the petitioners and the RDD submitted report in Rc. No. A5/165/2014, dated 24.10.2014, to the Commissioner. While so, against the said report of the RDD, the 5th respondent (sole petitioner in W.P. No. 6761 of 2018), i.e. The IDPL Employees Co-operative House Building Society preferred an appeal before the Joint Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, vide Case No. A4/901/2015. The Joint Collector, Medchal