IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDEABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.1907 of 2020 DATE : 16.04.2026 Between D. Thirupathaiah and another …Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the Impugned Proceedings No.C/645/2019, dated 01.10.2019 of the 3rd respondent in not de-marketing the boundaries in the land admeasuring Ac.5-20 gts in Sy.No.164/AA/1 and Sy.No.164/AA/2, situated at Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, though, the panchanama made by the Girdavar and Mandal Surveyor of Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District dated 23.09.2019, even then, the 3rd respondent simply rejected the case of the petitioners for demarcation of the land and in fixing the boundaries of the petitioners land, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential relief.”

2. Heard Sri C. Raja Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of land admeasuring Ac.5-20 gts in Sy.Nos.164/AA/1 and 164/AA/2, situated at Ambatpally Village, Lingala Mandal, Nagarkurnool District (hereinafter referred to as “the subject land”), having acquired the same under registered sale deed No.2527 of 1999, dated 14.12.1999 and petitioners herein are in possession and cultivating the subject land; that one V. Pullaiah, who is neighbor, having a land in Sy.No.152 made an application for conducting survey and to fix boundaries to his land and accordingly, survey was conducted and report was submitted on 03.06.2017; and that petitioner came to know that an extent of Ac.1-11 gts, belonging to the petitioners out of total extent of Ac.5-20 gts was shown as land belonging to said V. Pullaiah; that basing on the said survey, respondent No.3 is insisting upon the petitioners to give up the land to Sri V. Pullaiah.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that petitioners submitted representation dated 22.07.2019, to respondent No.3 for survey of land belonging to petitioners and fix the boundaries thereof, however, no action has been taken by the respondents; that petitioners earlier filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.18997 of 2019, and the same was disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to take appropriate action on the representation dated 22.07.2019, submitted by the petitioners for survey and demarcation of the subject land; that petitioners submitted another representations dated 30.10.2019 and 02.11.2019, requesting to conduct survey of subject land; that the respondent No.3 had issued proceedings dated 01.10.2019 stating that request of the petitioners for demarcation of land in Sy.No.164, cannot be considered in view of objections raised by other share holders in Sy.No.164 of Shainpet Village. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that there is dispute with regard to identification of lands belonging to petitioners and other land share holders and the respondents are bound to conduct survey and fix the boundaries once an application is made to that effect by paying requisite fee. However, respondent No.3 has issued proceedings dated 01.10.2019 stating that request of the petitioners cannot be considered in view of objections raised by other shareholders on demarcation of land which cannot be ground for non consideration of petitioners representations.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the respondents instead of considering the application submitted by the petitioners, have refused to conduct survey without any basis and valid grounds and thus, prayed to pass appropriate orders.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, would submit that in