HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ PetitionNo.25279 of 2008 Date: September 14 2011 Between: Middi Appala Narasamma and others … Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary and others … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus declaring the action of respondents 3 and 4-Police in interfering with the civil dispute between the petitioners herein and their mother in O.S.No.222 of 2006 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam as illegal and arbitrary and consequential directions to the respondents-Police not to interfere with the landed property of the petitioners admeasuring Ac.0.89 cents Ac.0.33 cents, Ac.0.31 cents and Ac.0.38 cents respectively covered by Sy.Nos.14/7, 19/11, 19/13 and 19/18 in Thalarivaripalem village of Gajuwaka Mandal. It is the case of the petitioners that their father, who was the original owner of the aforesaid landed property, died intestate leaving them and their mother behind and as their mother resisted for partition, they filed the aforementioned suit and a final decree was passed in I.A.No.1185 of 2008, as per which the lands in question have fallen to the share of the petitioners. It is the grievance of the petitioners that, at the instance of the parties to the suit, respondents 3 and 4 herein, without any authority or jurisdiction, are interfering with the said property and insisting them to part with the lands in question covered by the final decree proceedings. By order dated 18.11.2008, interim directions were issued to respondents 3 and 4 not to insist the petitioners to appear in the police station with regard to the dispute in question. The said order continued all along. The 4th respondent-Sub-Inspector of Police, Gajuwaka Police Station, has filed counter-affidavit. In the counter- affidavit, it is stated that petitioners were not summoned to the police station at any point of time and were never insisted to part with the lands in question. It is further stated that as there was dispute between the parties, a suo motu case was registered in Cr.No.587/2008 under Section 107 Cr.P.C., against petitioners 2 and 3, but they were not summoned to the police station. Though petitioners allege that respondents-Police are interfering in the civil dispute between them and their mother with regard to the property in question, the said allegation has been categorically denied in the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent. As it is stated that a case has been registered against petitioners 2 and 3, while it is open to the respondents- Police to proceed with the investigation, but they cannot insist the petitioners to part with the lands in question. In any event, as it is categorically averred by the respondents-Police in the counter-affidavit that there is no interference with the civil dispute between the petitioners and their mother with regard to the property in question and further it is denied that the petitioners were being summoned, I dispose of the writ petition placing on record the said averments made in the counter-affidavit. No costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) September 14, 2011 MRR