IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 16971 of 2008 Between: Mummaneni Vijay Kumar, S/o. Subba Rao, Governorpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District. 2 The Station House Officer, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District. 3 Potta Gangaraju, S/o. Not Known, R/o. Pathachimalavarigudem, Jeelugumilli Mandalam, West Godavari District. 4 Chinthala Polamma, W/o. Nageswara Rao, R/o. Pathachimalavarigudem, Jeelugumilli Mandalam, West Godavari District. 5 Potta Jagamma, W/o. Gangaraju, R/o. Pathachimalavarigudem, Jeelugumilli Mandalam, West Godavari District. 6 Potta Lakshmi, w/o. Venkateswara Rao, R/o. Pathachimalavarigudem, Jeelugumilli Mandalam, West Godavari District. 7 Chintala Nageswara Rao, S/o. not Known, R/o. Pathachimalavarigudem, Jeelugumilli Mandalam, West Godavari 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 writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No. 2 in not taking against the respondents 3 to 7 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300A of constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take action on the complaint dated 3-7-2008 as per law and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.APPADHARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respodnent Nos. 4 to 7: None The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO :16971 of 2008 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner is that the complaint dated 3.7.2008 lodged by the farm servant of the petitioner against one Chelamala Lakshminaraya to the 2nd respondent has not been registered and investigation taken up. In respect of such a grievance, the petitioner has a remedy under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Code’) as well as a right to ﬁle a private complaint before the Jurisdictional Magistrate. In view of the availability of such alternative remedies, this Court is not inclined to entertain the grievance. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate alternative remedies. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J DATE: 5th August, 2008 pnb