ORDER:

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the action of the respondent No.4 in issuing the impugned Memo vide No.B/5419/2016, dated 06.12.2016 rejecting the application of the petitioner for surveying the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.7-35 guntas in Sy.No.342 of Uddamarri Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that earlier the petitioner approached this Court and filed W.P.No.35164 of 2016. In spite of application made by the petitioner, the respondents are not conducting survey and fixing boundaries in respect of the suit schedule land. After hearing both sides, this Court disposed of the above said writ petition directing the respondent authorities to consider the application of the petitioner dated 06.07.2016 for conducting survey and demarcation of land after receiving necessary charges, keeping in view the Circulars vide Rc.No.N1/1408/07, dated 13.07.2007, Rc.No.N1/6543/99, dated 25.07.2001 and Rc.No.N2/1741/2010, dated 18.05.2010 and also in terms of the Judgment of this Court in W.A.No.618 of 2013 and also keeping in view of the provisions of Sections 89, 89-A and 92 of Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 and take necessary action and communicate the decision to the parties.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents without considering the application made by the petitioner, as per the direction of this Court in W.P.No.35164 of 2016, dated 19.10.2016, have rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not appended the certified copy of latest pahani patrika/

adangal (from village record) containing the name of the applicant in the above pahani patrika and copy of the Pattedar Pass Book and Title Deed along with the application dated 06.07.2016. The respondents without issuing any notice with regard to the submission of documents, straightaway rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted any required documents along with the application dated 06.07.2016. The reason for passing the said impugned orders is that the petitioner has approached this Court and filed W.P.No.35164 of 2016, dated 19.10.2016 and requested to set aside the impugned Memo dated

06.12.2016 and requested to allow the writ petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue basing on the counter submits that in compliance with the orders of this Court dated 19.10.2016 in W.P.No.35164 of 2016, the Tahsildar has taken the matter on file and after enquiring the matter in detail with reference to entries in revenue records, physical possession and rule position, rightly rejected the request of the petitioner for demarcation of land in the suit schedule land and communicated the same to the petitioner. Instead of filing the appeal and without availing remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court and filed the above writ petition. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue further submits that after filing of the writ petition, the petitioner approached Lokayuktha for filing complaint in Complaint No.462/2017/B1 and the same was dismissed. Without bringing into notice of this Court about the compliant made by the petitioner in the Lokayuktha, the petitioner has filed instant writ petition by suppressing the facts and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

7. After hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is questioning the inaction of the respondents in not conducting the survey and demarcation of the suit schedule land whereas on the complaint made by the petitioner on 06.07.2016, this Court in W.P.No.35164 of 2016, af