Musuku Saya Reddy vs Smt. Shilpa Dhananiwala
2023 Latest Caselaw 1567 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                       AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI


                     Writ Appeal No.421 of 2023

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)


       Heard Mr.Gowtham Krishna, learned counsel for the

appellants; Mr.Ch.Naresh Reddy, learned counsel for

respondent Nos.1 to 5 / writ petitioners; and Mr.T.Srikanth

Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue

representing respondent Nos.6, 7 and 8.

2. This intra court appeal is directed against the

order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge

disposing of Writ Petition No.2906 of 2023 filed by

respondent Nos.1 to 5 as the writ petitioners. Appellants

were not arrayed as respondents in the writ petition.

However, on leave being granted, they have filed the

present appeal.

3. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 had filed the related writ

petition seeking the following relief:

"Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ order or direction one more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents Nos.2 and 3 in not conducting the survey to identify and demarcate the boundaries along with measurements in respect of the Petitioners land admeasuring Ac.3-20 gts, Sy.No.212 and Sy.No.222/E admeasuring Ac.2-07 gts, Sy.No.224 admeasuring Ac.3-25 gts., Sy.No.217 admeasuring Ac.1-11 gts, Sy.No.216 admeasuring Ac.1-17 gts, Sy.No.223/2, admeasuring Ac.2-10 gts., Ac.223/3, admeasuring Ac.0-30 gts., Sy.No.218/2 admeasuring Ac.0-24 gts., Sy.No.212, admeasuring Ac.3-23 gts., and Sy.No.222/E, admeasuring Ac.3-20 gts., situated at Dilawarpur Village and Mandal, Nirmal District as being illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of Telangana Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 consequently direct the Respondents Nos.2 and 3 to forthwith conduct a survey and demarcate the subject lands of the Petitioner along with measurements."

4. Learned Single Judge recorded the facts projected

by respondent Nos.1 to 5 as under:

"Petitioner No.1 is claiming that she is the absolute owner and possessor of lands admeasuring Ac.3-20 gts., in Sy.No.212 and Ac.2-07 gts., in Sy.No.222/E, on the strength of registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.4895 of 2013 dated 27-06-2013 and 4899 of 2013 dated 28-06-2013. Petitioner No.2 is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of lands admeasuring Ac.3-25 gts., in Sy.No.224 and Ac.1-11 gts., in Sy.No.217, on the strength of registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.4900 of 2013 dated 18-06-2013 and 4902 of 2013 dated 28- 06-2013. Petitioner No.3 is claiming that she is the absolute owner and possessor of lands admeasuring Ac.1-17 gts., in Sy.No.216, Ac.2-10 gts., in Sy.No.223/2 and Ac.0-30 gts., in Sy.No.223/3, on the strength of registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.4901 of 2013 dated 28-06-2013 and 4903 of 2013 dated 28-05-2013. Petitioner No.4 is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.0-24 gts., in Sy.No.218/2, on the strength of a registered sale deed bearing document No.4897 of 2013 dated 28-06-2013. Petitioner No.5 is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of lands admeasuring Ac.3-23 gts., in Sy.No.212 and Ac.3-20 gts., in Sy.No.222/E, on the strength of registered sale

deeds bearing document Nos.4896 of 2013 and 4898 of 2013 dated 28-06-2013 situated at Dilawarpur village and mandal, Nirmal District. In proof of the same they have filed copies of sale deeds. They have submitted F-line applications bearing Challan Nos.0201341638, 0201341718, 0201341649, 0201341693 and 0201341707, all are dated 31-03-2021 with respondent Nos.2 and 3 with a request to conduct survey and demarcate the aforesaid lands by fixing the boundaries. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said F-line applications, respondent Nos.2 and 3 did not act upon the same. Therefore, the present writ petition.

5. After hearing learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Revenue who had submitted that F-Line

applications filed by respondent Nos.1 to 5 would be

considered by respondent Nos.7 and 8, learned Single

Judge disposed of the writ petition as under:

"In view of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the F-line applications bearing Challan Nos.0201341638, 0201341718, 0201341649, 0201341693 and 0201341707, all are dated 31-03-2021 submitted by the petitioners, conduct survey and demarcate the aforesaid lands by fixing boundaries, strictly in

accordance with law by putting the petitioner and all affected parties on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. If respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not inclined to accept the claim / request of the petitioners, they shall assign specific reasons, pass a reasoned order and shall communicate copy of the said order to the petitioners. They shall complete the entire exercise within a period of forty five (45) working days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs."

6. Thus, learned Single Judge directed respondent

Nos.7 and 8 to consider the F-Line applications of

respondent Nos.1 to 5 strictly in accordance with law by

putting them and all affected parties on notice and

affording them an opportunity of hearing. In the event,

respondent Nos.7 and 8 are not inclined to accept the

claim of respondent Nos.1 to 5, they have been directed to

assign specific reasons by passing a speaking order and to

communicate the same to respondent Nos.1 to 5.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

appellants have a claim over the land in respect of which F-

Line applications have been filed. In this connection,

appellants are contesting O.S.No.113 of 2016 pending on

the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nirmal. He further submits

that W.P(C).No.42970 of 2017 filed by respondent No.2 is

pending before this Court. The said writ petition also

pertains to the land in question. Therefore, appellants were

necessary parties to the writ proceedings and in their

absence learned Single Judge ought not to have disposed

of the writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits

that subject matter of writ petition in W.P(C).No.42970 of

2017 is different from the subject matter of the related writ

petition. In W.P(C).No.42970 of 2017, the prayer made is

for a direction to the revenue authorities to restore the

name of respondent No.2 in the possessory column in

respect of a portion of the subject land.

9. On a query by the Court as to what is the purpose

of filing the F-Line applications, learned counsel for

respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that the same is for the

purpose of survey and demarcation. Obviously any action

on survey and demarcation is intrinsically linked with the

possessory right over the land in question.

10. That being the position, we are of the view that

the matter should be heard afresh after making the

appellants respondents in the writ proceedings.

11. Accordingly we set aside the order dated

08.02.2023 and remand Writ Petition No.2906 of 2023 to

the file of the learned Single Judge having roster to re-hear

the same after making the appellants respondents in the

said proceedings.

12. All the contentions are kept open.

13. Writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J 11.04.2023 MRM