Order Issues raised in these writ petitions are common and identical and therefore, they have been clubbed together and are heard and disposed of by this common order. 2. Petitioners have questioned the survey conducted by the Joint Director of Land Records, Survey Settlement of Land and Records, K.R. Circle, Bangalore, respondent No.3 in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014, which writ petitions shall be referred to during the course of this order visàvis the facts of the case as well documents that have been annexed thereto. Petitioners have consequently sought resurvey of the lands, which are in their possession and occupation. 3. The relevant facts of the case are that petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 is in occupation of several survey numbers in Byrasandra Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. Those lands are adjacent to a lake called Kelaginakere, Byrasandra. Survey number assigned to the lake is Sy. No.112. There have been several proceedings initiated in regard to the alleged encroachment of land by the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 and other persons with regard to the lake in question. In fact, the jurisdictional Tahsildar i.e., Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, had issued notice dated 30.08.2013 to the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014. That notice was assailed in W.P. Nos. 40082-40085/2013 before this Court. On 19.12.2013, this Court disposed the writ petitions by observing that the petitioner therein would reply to the impugned notice and respondent therein on considering the reply within a period of two months would pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Till then, the revenue authorities were directed not to take any precipitative action against the petitioner therein. It is stated at the Bar that respective petitioners in W.P. No. 56623/2014 and W.P. No. 57213/2014 have purchased various extents of land from the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 19.12.2013, petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 replied to the notice, but it is submitted at the Bar that till date, no orders have been passed in the said proceedings. 4. When the matter stood thus, the Lake Development Authority (L.D.A.) passed an order on 26.09.2013 in proceeding No. CEO/LDA/Kelaginakere Byrasandra/1314/2001 rejecting the request made by petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 to conduct resurvey of land bearing Sy. 4. When the matter stood thus, the Lake Development Authority (L.D.A.) passed an order on 26.09.2013 in proceeding No. CEO/LDA/Kelaginakere Byrasandra/1314/2001 rejecting the request made by petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 to conduct resurvey of land bearing Sy. No. 112 as well as the adjacent lands by the Commissioner of Survey Settlement of Land Records. That order was challenged in W.P. No.46381/2013. This Court, by order dated 29.01.2014, held that the petitioner therein had made out a case with regard to quashing of the order dated 26.09.2013 and on quashing that order of L.D.A., directed the L.D.A., to consider the application filed by the petitioner therein for the purpose of resurvey and to conduct resurvey in the presence of petitioner therein and others, who may have interest in the lands in question. Subsequently, on 20.11.2014, the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 made a representation to the Commissioner, Survey Settlement and Land Records, K.R. Circle, Bangalore1, seeking resurvey of various extents of lands adjacent to the lake i.e., Kelagina kere, Byrasandra. Pursuant to that request, respondent No.2 – Commissioner, Survey Settlement and Land Records issued notice dated 24.11.2014 stating that a resurvey would be conducted on 26.11.2014 at 11 a.m. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 sent a representation on 25.11.2014 seeking three days’ time. A similar request was made to the 3rd respondent herein – Joint Director of Land Records. However, on the very next day i.e., from 26.11.2014 upto 01.12.2014, the respondent authorities conducted the survey. According to petitioners, they were not present on those days when the survey was conducted. It is also stated that no notice of survey was issued to respective petitioners in W.P. Nos. 56623/2014 and W.P. No. 57213/2014. It is under these circumstances that petitioners have assailed the survey conducted by respondents between 26.11.2014 and 01.12.2014. 5. I have heard learned senior counsel and the other learned counsel for petitioners, learned AGA., for respondent authorities and learned counsel appearing for Lake Development Authority and perused the material on record. 6. 56623/2014 and W.P. No. 57213/2014. It is under these circumstances that petitioners have assailed the survey conducted by respondents between 26.11.2014 and 01.12.2014. 5. I have heard learned senior counsel and the other learned counsel for petitioners, learned AGA., for respondent authorities and learned counsel appearing for Lake Development Authority and perused the material on record. 6. During the course of submission, learned senior counsel as well as other counsel for petitioners drew my attention to Rule 84(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, to contend that less than three days’ notice was given to the petitioner in W.P. Nos.56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 and that the period of notice was contrary to the stipulation in Rule 84 of the said Rules. That express request was made by the petitioner for granting at least three further days so that they could prepare for the survey by presenting the relevant documents, but respondent authorities did not heed to the request of petitioners and have completed survey, which is contrary to the provision of law. 7. As far as the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 56623/2014 and 57213/2014 are concerned, their counsel contended that they had no notice of the survey conducted from 26.11.2014 to 01.12.2014 and therefore, survey conducted by the respondent authorities does not bind them. In the circumstances, petitioners seek a resurvey of the lands in question and to give them an opportunity to be present when the survey is being conducted. 8. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent authorities states that this is not the first time that survey has been conducted. It was at the instance of the petitioner in W.P. Nos. 56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 and pursuant to the direction issued by this Court that survey was conducted by the respondent authorities. Petitioners were aware of the survey that was conducted on those dates as notices were sent to them, but they did not choose to be present with the relevant documents on those days and this Court may not show any indulgence to them by once again ordering resurvey of the lake as well as the lands in question. Petitioners were aware of the survey that was conducted on those dates as notices were sent to them, but they did not choose to be present with the relevant documents on those days and this Court may not show any indulgence to them by once again ordering resurvey of the lake as well as the lands in question. Alternatively, it was submitted that in case this Court decides to order resurvey then, the same would be done in accordance with law after issuing notice to petitioners herein and survey would be conducted in respect of survey numbers of lands that were surveyed from 26.11.2014 to 01.12.2014, which are adjacent to or surrounding Kelaginakere, Byrasandra, which is in Sy. No.112. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, it is noted that pursuant to the direction issued by this Court on 29.01.2014 in W.P. No.46381/2013, the respondent authorities decided to conduct survey of the lands adjacent to and surrounding Sy.No.112, which is in respect of the lake Kelaginakere, Byrasandra. However, it is noted that sufficient notice was not given to the petitioner in W.P. Nos.56017, 56096-56100 of 2014 and that no notice was issued to the other two petitioners. In the circumstances, the survey conducted was not in accordance with law in so far as these petitioners are concerned. Hence, respondent authorities are directed to conduct a fresh survey of the lands that were surveyed between 26.11.2014 and 01.12.2014 after issuing notice to petitioners herein and other persons in respect of whose lands, survey is to be conducted. By giving at least seven clear days notice, the survey shall be conducted. It is needless to observe that the survey shall be conducted in accordance with law and a Survey Report shall be prepared thereafter. 10. It is also observed that in case, petitioners herein do not appear at the proposed survey to be conducted by respondents without any good reason then, they would be estopped from seeking resurvey of the lands in question. Writ petitions stand disposed with the aforesaid observations and directions.