Telangana High Court
WP/28912/2019 of Udathaneni Appa Rao Vs The State of Telangana on 30 December 2019
SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28912 OF 2019 Dated:30.12.2019 Between: Udathaneni Appa Rao, S/o. Late Satyam, Aged about 56 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.16-12, Vidyanagar, Krushi School Road, Ayyagaripeta, Sattupalli, Khammam and another .. Petitioners And The State of
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.28912 OF 2019
Dated:30.12.2019
Between:
Udathaneni Appa Rao, S/o. Late Satyam, Aged about 56 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.16-12, Vidyanagar, Krushi School Road, Ayyagaripeta, Sattupalli, Khammam and another
.. Petitioners
And
The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
WRIT PETITION No.28912 OF 2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.
2. Petitioners are aggrieved by the report of the Deputy Inspector of Survey, Khammam District. They submit that the finding of the Survey Inspector that in respect of land to an extent of Ac.1.05 guntas, no demarcation can be done as there is no Sub-Divisional Record in respect of the above extent of land is not correct.
3. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, demarcation ought to have been done on the above extent of land consequent to re-conveying the land and patta land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.0.17 guntas in Survey No.225 of Khanapuram Village.
4. Petitioners are aggrieved by disinclination of survey authorities in determining the survey boundaries. If that is so, remedy of appeal is available to the next higher authority and without availing the said remedy, petitioners filed this Writ Petition. The matter requires consideration with regard to verification of the facts and the physical features of the property. Therefore, the Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition.
5. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed granting liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy of appeal. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
P. NAVEEN RAO, J
Date:30.12.2019
KH