SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 13006

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J
PEDDAGAMALLA YESODA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 10823 of 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: NIMMAGADDA REVATHI
For the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

Judicial intervention is warranted when government authorities fail to fulfill their legal duties, specifically concerning property rights and boundary fixation.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 21 - Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 and Board Standing Order 34-A and 34-B - Writ of Mandamus was sought for the inaction of the respondents on an application for conducting survey and fixing boundaries of land - The petitioner claimed to be the land owner and in possession, asserting that the authorities had delayed addressing her F-line application. (Paras 3 and 4)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The High Court has jurisdiction to direct authorities to fulfill their legal obligations where there is a failure to act - The court disposed of the petition directing the authorities to consider the application within two months and pass orders accordingly. (Paras 3 and 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner owns a plot of land and filed an application for surveying and fixing boundaries, which was delayed by the authorities. Persistent demand for action led to her filing a writ petition in court.

Findings of Court:
The court ordered the concerned authorities to expedite the consideration of the petitioner’s F-line application while adhering to legal procedures.

Issues: Whether the respondents can be mandated to act on the petitioner’s application under the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court recognized the imperative for government authorities to act in accordance with their legal obligations, allowing for judicial intervention when such duties are neglected.

Result: The Writ Petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.

Table of Content
1. petitioner asserts rights over land and the failure of authorities to act on application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court directs authorities to address the application for surveying the property. (Para 3 , 4)

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of respondents on my Online F-Line Application dt. 03.03.2022 submitted for conducting survey and fixation of boundaries for my landed property of Ac. 2.95 cents covered by Survey No. 50-1 of Gampalagudem Revenue Village in Gampalagudem Mandal of N.T.R District (Erst while Krishna District), as illegal, irregular, irrational, amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on them under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act , 1923 and Board Standing Order 34-A and 34-B of Andhra Pradesh Board of Revenue Standing Orders and offends Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5 to conduct survey and fix boundaries for the aforesaid land and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Shorn of all unnecessary facts in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is the specific case of the petitioner that she is the land owner and is in the possession of the land and has submitted F- Line application dated 03.03.2022 through Mee Seva for conducting survey and fixation of boundaries of her land an extent of Ac.2-95 cents covered by Sy.No.50-1 of Gampalagudem Revenue Village in Gampalagudem Mandal of N.T.R. District, to avoid disputes with the neighbouring land owners and the respondent-authorities went on postponing the survey and when there was persistent demand by the petitioner on the obstruction by neighbouring land owners and questioning the said inaction on the part of respondent-authorities in processing the F-Line application of the petitioner, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court.

2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents has submitted that appropriate action will be taken on the F-Line application submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.

3. Considering the submissions of both the counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the concerned authorities to consider the F-Line application dated 03.03.2022 submitted by the petitioner for conducting survey and fixation of boundaries of the petitioner’s land by issuing notice to all concerned/interested persons, and pass orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top