APHC010260332020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17165/2020 Between: 1.SRI. BIRUDA VEERA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA MURTHY,, S/O. SRIHARI RAO, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. D.NO. 1-46, YALLAVARI SAVARAM, PEDDAPURAPPADU, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PANCHAYAT RAJ) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER CUM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KAKINDA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, (ERSTWHILE THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER), KARAPA, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 5.THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, PEDDAPURAPPADU GRAMPANCHAYAT, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6.THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, KARAPA, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 7.THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, PEDDAPURAPPADU, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 8.SRI THEMMANABOINA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 1-36, YALLAVARI SAVARAM, PEDDAPURAPPADU, KARAPA MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent No. 5 to 7 in not furnishing the report of the survey dated 08-09-2020 vide No. GWSA 70228449 in FL No. FL/9/2020 conducted on 20-08-2020 in a proper and perspective manner and without identifying the boundaries as specified in the Regd. Sale Deed dated 06-06-1958 vide Doct No. 3395/1958 in respect of land admeasuring Ac. 0- 14cents in Sy. No. 147-1, situated at Peddapurrappadu Village, Karapa Mandal, East Godavari District besides interfering into the peaceful possession of the petitioner property by the 8th respondent taking advantage of not showing the boundaries in the report of the respondents as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and violative of principles of natural justice, as also violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 to resurvey the above said land and furnish the report in a proper and perspective manner showing the boundaries as per Regd. Sale Deed dated 06-06-1958 and also direct the 8th respondent not to encroach or trespass into the Northern Side land of the Petitioner land to an extent of 60 Sq.yards without interfering into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner schedule property and not to stop / close the sluice from passing of rain water from the premises of the Petitioner to outside and to pass…” 2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities have failed to furnish the survey report dated 08.09.2020, pursuant to the survey said to have been conducted on 20.08.2020, without adhering to proper and transparent manner, without duly identifying the boundaries as specified/described at the schedule of registered sale deed dated 06.06.1958, vide Document No.3395/1958, the schedule of said registered sale deed recites that the land admeasuring is in an extent of Ac.0.14 cents in Sy. No. 147/1 situated at Peddapurrapadu Village, Karapa Mandal, East Godavari District. It is further alleged that the unofficial respondent No. 8 is interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property by taking advantage of the omission of boundary particulars in the survey report prepared by the respondent authorities which is contrary to law, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. None represented for the petitioner. 4. Heard the learned Standing counsel for the 5th respondent Gram Panchayat. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent Gram Panchayat filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that “It is submitted that the averments made in para no.3 & 4 of the affidavit states that Sri. Biruda Srihari Rao and his three sons have acquired the ancestral property from his lawful owner Sri. Biruda Veeranna who is none other than the father of Biruda Srihari Rao and grandfather of the Petitioner and his brothers. Sri. Biruda Srihari Rao and his three sons have acquired the ancestral property from his lawful owner Sri. Biruda Veeranna who is none other than the father of Biruda Srihari Rao and grandfather of the Petitioner and his brothers. It is further submitted that Sri. Biruda Veeranna has purchased the property from its lawful owners namely Smt. Sooramma, W/o. Late. Nunna Kondanna and 7 others in the year 1958 and the same was also registered in the District Registrar Office, Kakinda vide Doct No. 3395/1958 dated 06- 06-1958. Therefore in reply to this this respondent not known about the title of the petitioner, the petitioner has to prove the same. It is submitted that the averments made in para no.5 of the affidavit states that from the date of purchase of the said property, Sri. Biruda Srihari Rao has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same till his death. The said B. Srihari Rao has died 20-07-1995 leaving behind his three sons, copy of the Death Certificate dated 14-08-1995 obtained from the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Karapa Mandal, East Godavari is also herewith filed in reply to this respondent not known about the title of the petitioner, the petitioner has to prove the same. It is submitted that the averments made in para no.6 of the affidav states that made a representation on 27-04- 2020 to the 6th and 7th respondents, requesting them to survey the house bearing No. 1-45/46, in Sy. No. 147-1, to an extent of Ac. 0-14 Cents situated at Yallavari Savaram, Peddapurappadu, Karapa Mandal, East Godavari District. But the respondents have not taken any necessary action against my said representation, copy of the same was also addressed to the respondent Nos. 2 and 4. Copy of the representation dated 27-04-2020 is herewith filed. It is true that the petitioner made a representation on 27-04-2020. Therefore, in reply to this averment, there is civil dispute between the petitioner and his neighbor with respect to the passage of drain water. Thereafter the Mandal Surveyor tried to conduct the survey, the petitioner himself refused to conduct the survey, since the petitioner has settled the dispute with the neighbor by the letter dated 20.08.2020. Therefore the Gram Panchayat never involved with the said dispute and not passed any resolution yet. Hence if any the petitioner and his neighbor should approach the competent civil court. 6. He further submits that the petitioner’s claim is relates to a private property, and there is a civil dispute exists between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent regarding the flow of drain water in respect of the subject property. Moreover, it is not the case of the petitioner that the Gram Panchayat is neither interfering with the petitioner’s private property or taking any action regarding the subject land in connection with the dispute between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent. It is further submitted that the parties herein are required to resolve their disputes, through civil proceedings pending before the competent civil court. 7. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, and perused the material available on record. It appears that there is civil dispute between them. It is clear and categorical admission made by the respondents in their counter affidavit that the subject property is purely private property and they did not have any concern in respect of subject property. Therefore, the Gram Panchayat has neither interfered with nor taken any action in respect of the subject land concerning with the dispute between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. Hence, both the parties are required to resolve their dispute through appropriate proceedings before the competent civil court. 8. In view of the aforesaid clear and categorical admissions as elucidated above, this Court is of the considered view that no further orders are warranted in the present Writ Petition. As the subject property is purely private property and the respondent authorities categorically stated that they have not interfered with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment thereof. The dispute is confined to civil rights of the petitioner against the unofficial respondents. It is clear even from the relief claimed in the prayer of the Writ Petition. Therefore, it is settled principles of law that private property rights between petitioner and unofficial respondents cannot be enforced under Article 226 of Constitution of India. More so, the petitioner is provided alternative remedies under Civil Law to enforce his rights. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue his remedies by instituting appropriate proceedings before the competent civil court against the unofficial respondents in respect of the subject property. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 26.09.2025 klk 625 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:17165 of 2020 26.09.2025 klk