JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The appellants challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C)No.18687/2020, primarily asserting that the imprimatur granted therein to Ext.R8(l) report of sketch and survey settled by the competent Authorities is improper and illegal because, they were not heard, nor were they given any opportunity at the time when it was so done.

2. Sri.R.Reji – learned counsel for the appellants, pointed out that, as evident from the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has fully approved Ext.R8(l) and has only directed the Authorities to take follow-up action, after hearing his clients. He argued that this will now lead to a situation where the dispute between the parties has been prejudged, with his clients only in a position to object to the further action and not to the fundamental cause. He prayed that, therefore, the impugned judgment be set aside and the Authorities concerned be directed to conduct a fresh survey after hearing all sides.

3. Sri.K.Mohana Kannan – learned counsel for respondents 8 and 9, in response, submitted that the afore contention of the appellants is not tenable because, Ext.R8(l) was settled after followin