THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.32741 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For all the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or any appropriate writ/s or direction/s more particularly in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the day to day activities and possession of the petitioner over Acs.13.29 cents in Sy.No.75 Jafalapuram Village within Panchayat limits of Kambalpadu, Podili, Prakasam District, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner.” It is the allegation of the petitioner that though dispute between him and the fourth respondent is civil in nature, at the instance of the fourth respondent, respondents 2 and 3 are interfering with his possession over the land admeasuring Acs.13.29 cents covered by Survey No.75 situated at Jafalapuram Village within Panchayat limits of Kambalpadu, Podili, Prakasam District. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that the petitioner lodged a complaint with the police on 23.12.2010 stating that the fourth respondent along with her henchmen trespassed into his land and tried to beat him, and requested to take action. It is stated that on such complaint, the Station House Officer, Podili Police Station, made an entry in General Diary and the enquiry revealed that the fourth respondent did not trespass into the land of the petitioner and did not threaten him. It is further stated that the dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent is of civil nature and O.S.No.7 of 2008 with regard thereto is pending on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Podili, as such, the petitioner was advised to approach the Court of law. It is also stated that respondents 1 to 3 have denied the allegation that they are interfering with day-to-day activities of the petitioner and his possession over the land in question. Though there is an allegation made by the petitioner against respondents 2 and 3, based on the written instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that there is no interference by respondents 2 and 3 with the possession of the petitioner over the land in question. In that view of the matter, recording the statement of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that respondents 2 and 3 are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the land in question, this writ petition is disposed of. Any such complaint further will be viewed seriously. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 30th DECEMBER, 2010. kvni