IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 27005 of 2005 Between: Chidam Mallaiah, S/o. Sammaiah, R/o. Venkatapuram Village and Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Venkatapuram P.S., Venkatapuram Vill & Mandal, Khammam District. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Khammam. 3 Mandal Revenue Officer, Venkatapuram, Khammam District. 4 The Director of Survey, Settlements and Land Records, Srurvey Bhavan, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. 5 Smt. yatam Rajakka, W/o. Mallaiah, R/o. Venkatapuram Vill and Mandal, Khammam District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the actions of the respondents as illegal and arbitrary and to directing the respondents not to harass the petitioner and not to disturb the possession of the petitioner from the land in Sy.No.98 extent of H.2- 03 Aires situated in Venkatapuram Village and Mandal, Khammam District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.KAMESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 27005 of 2005 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in harassing the petitioner and attempting to disturb his possession from the land in survey No.98 to an extent of H.2-03 Aires situated in Venkatapuram Village and Mandal of Khammam District. In response to the Rule Nisi ordered, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Venkatapuram Police Station, filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations made and further stating that they never interfered with the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the fifth respondent and that they did not pressurize the petitioner to hand over the possession to the fifth respondent herein. Though appearance has been entered on behalf of the fifth respondent, no counter affidavit is filed on his behalf. In view of what has been stated in the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2, no further enquiry is necessary. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the land in question in any manner whatsoever without following due process of law. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 22-01-2009 SUR / KLP