The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in not conducting a survey of his land admeasuring Ac.0.20 guntas in Sy.No.179 of Gudivada Village, Kethepally Mandal, Nalgonda District, and in not fixing boundary stones thereat, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice. He seeks a consequential direction to the respondents to conduct a survey of the subject land, and fix boundary stones thereat.

The petitioner claims to be the owner, and to be in possession, of the subject land having purchased it under registered sale deed dated 28.12.2005. It is his case that pattadar pass books and title deeds were issued to him, and his name was mutated in the revenue records; as on date he is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land, and has been raising paddy crops; subsequent to purchase of the subject land, he dug a bore-well thereat; the subject lands, and the lands adjacent thereto, are private patta lands; he filed O.S. No.103 of 2008 before the Junior Civil Judge, Nakrekal, Nalgonda District seeking perpetual injunction to restrain Sri Podicheti Lingaiah, (who the petitioner claims was interfering with his possession over the subject lands), and his men; the Learned Junior Civil Judge, in his judgment dated 05.10.2012, held that the petitioner had proved his exclusive possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property (Ac.0.20 guntas of land in Sy. No.179), and it should be protected from the unnecessary interference of Sri Podicheti Lingaiah and his men who had no right to interfere with the subject land; with a view to resolve the disputes with the adjacent land owners, he had submitted an application on 17.10.2012 to the Tahsildar, Kethepally Mandal, Nalgonda District (third respondent) remitting the required fees for conducting a survey of the subject land; the third respondent, by letter dated 07.10.2012, had sent a letter to the second respondent directing him to conduct a survey and fix boundary stones; and, while a notice dated 31.10.2012 was issued by the Deputy Inspector of Survey, Nalgonda District (fourth respondent) fixing the date of survey as 08.11.2012, no survey was conducted.

Sri Palivela Satyarajababu, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that a duty/obligation is cast on the respondents to conduct a survey, and fix boundary stones on the subject lands, in accordance with law; respondent Nos.2 to 4 had failed to comply with their obligatoins of conducting the survey; since the petitioner had submitted an application, paying the requisite fees, respondent Nos.3 and 4 ought to have surveyed the subject lands; their failure to do so was arbitrary and illegal; the petitioner was entitled to question their failure, to survey the subject lands, in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; and it is unnecessary for him to approach the competent Civil Court for the relief sought for herein. Learned Counsel would place reliance on the circular, issued by the Commissioner of Survey, Settlements and Land Records, Hyderabad dated 10.6.1989; and the Judgments of this Court in B. Ram Das v. The Assistant Director, Survey & Land Records, Ranga Reddy District (Judgment in W.P. No.13350 of 2005 dated 10.03.2006) and A. Krishna Reddy V. Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal R.R. District (2009 (1) ALD (NOC) 15)

The A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, and the A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, provide for an official survey/measurement of lands in certain circumstances. The law relating to survey of lands and settlement of boundary disputes has been consolidated under the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (Act 8 of 1923). Section 3(ii) thereof defines ‘Government Land’ to mean any land not forming an estate, or any portion thereof. It is evident from Section 3(ii) that lands, other than those forming part of an estate or a part thereof, are “government lands” including privat