PUCHAKATLA TIRUPATHI RAO Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners that the 1st petitioner is the registered owner of the property bearing in Sy No. 904 for total extent of Ac. 1.68 11/2 cents situated Kavali Bit - I. He has purchased the said property from his lawful vendor vide Regd. Document No. 131/2002 dtd. 19/2/2002. On 23/2/2012 the 1st petitioner sold part of the extent Ac. 0.98 1/2 cents to Sri Janigarla Mahendra vide Document No. 463/2012 by retaining the remaining extent with him. Further, on 4/2/2015 the 1st petitioner executed gift settlement deed in favour of his wife, who is 2nd petitioner herein for an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents, vide Document No. 373/2015 by retaining left over extent Ac. 0.23 cents and that the 1st petitioner too executed rectification deed in favour of his wife/2nd petitioner herein rectifying wrongly mentioned boundaries in the Gift settlement deed dtd. 12/12/2012 with correct boundaries vide Doc No. 567/2018 which was registered office of Sub Registrar, Kavali. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner made an application dtd. 18/10/2022 to the Tahsildar, seeking for sub division of patta in respect of Sy No. 904 for an extent of Ac. 1.68 11/2 cents bifurcating 98 1/2 cents in favour of Janigarla Mahendra pursuant to registered document No. 463/2012 dtd. 24/2/2012; and Ac. 0.50 cents in favour of Smt.Puchakatla Bharathi Devi vide Document No. 373/2015 dtd. 4/2/2015 and rectification deed vide Document No. 567/2018 dtd. 17/2/2018 by retaining the remaining extent of Ac. 0.23 cents. He further stated that as there is boundary dispute in between him and adjacent owners, he approached the 3rd respondent through "On Line" by paying necessary charges seeking to survey the land and fix up the boundaries. The Thasildar issued an endorsement as if the Mandal Surveyor visited on 7/10/2022 on that date the petitioner and other adjacent owners who raised boundary dispute are present, on enquiry as if it is not feasible for survey for the land in Sy No. 904-1A for an extent of Ac. 0.20 cents, he issued an endorsement say so as if it is not sub divided as if, the adjacent owner is not willing to survey, so that rejected the petitioner request under BSO 34 A Para 20 (a). Similarly the application made by his wife seeking to survey the land in Sy No. 904-1B for an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents is also rejected on the premise as if the adjacent neighbor land owners are not cooperating. Questioning the said endorsements, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard Sri T.C. Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.