IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND TEN WRIT PETITION No.26263 of 2009 Between: V.Rama Krishna. … Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Guntur District, Guntur and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri C.V.R.Rudra Prasad. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioner by continuing the rowdy sheet with the Police Station of respondent No.3, even though the same is not reviewed pursuant to the direction of this Court in Writ Petition No.27101 of 2007, dated 23-10-2008, and interfering with the petitioner’s day to day activities, as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the A.P. Police Standing Orders. I have heard Sri C.V.R.Rudra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. Having worked in Armed Medical Corps of Indian Army for a period of 16 years, the petitioner retired from service. He settled down in his native village- Mandadam, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. A rowdy sheet was opened against him by respondent No.3, vide: order dated 20-8-2007 passed by respondent No.2. Questioning opening of the rowdy sheet, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.27101 of 2007. After considering the pleadings of both the parties, this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition by order, dated 23-10- 2008, with the directions to the respondents to review the case of the petitioner, after giving him an opportunity of hearing and take an appropriate decision as to whether to continue the rowdy sheet for a further period; such exercise shall be completed on or before 31-12- 2008; and the order passed thereon shall be communicated to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the purported inaction of the respondents in complying with the above mentioned order, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. In response to the notice of this Court, respondent No.3 filed a counter-affidavit, wherein, it is, inter alia, stated that the petitioner is a rowdy element and was involved in as many as seven cases, the details of which are given in paragraph 2 of the counter-affidavit. It is further stated that to curb and curtail his unlawful activities in the vicinity and after obtaining permission from respondent No.2-the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Guntur Rural Division, a rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner on 2-10-2007; and that the same is being continued and reviewed from time to time and stands extended till 31-12-2010. As regards the complaint of the petitioner that the order in Writ Petition No.27101 of 2007 has not been complied with, it is stated that in obedience to the said direction, the then Sub-Inspector of Police issued notice, dated 31-12-2008, asking the petitioner to approach respondent No.3-Police Station and plead his case; and that the petitioner did not approach the Police station in pursuance of the said notice. It is, however, stated that appropriate orders will be passed after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that respondent No.3 has consciously and deliberately violated the order of this Court by keeping quiet till 31-12-2008 and purported to issue the notice on the said day, which was the last date fixed for reviewing the petitioner’s case and taking a decision thereon. He submitted that the said notice was not received by the petitioner within the said time and that it was received by the petitioner during the night of 31-12-2008, by which time the time limit set by this Court had expired. The learned counsel further submitted that respondent No.3 has done this deliberately to frustrate the orders of this Court. The question whether respondent No.3 has committed contempt of the order of this Court or not does not fall within the scope of this Writ Petition. The petitioner is, therefore, given liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings against respondent No.3 if he feels that the said respondent has committed contempt of Court. As regards the review to be made by respondent No.3, as directed by this Court, in view of the categorical statement made by the said respondent in the counter- affidavit that on receipt of representation from the petitioner appropriate orders will be passed, the petitioner is permitted to submit a representation to respondent No.3, who shall take appropriate steps to see that the petitioner’s case is reviewed by the competent authority. The petitioner shall file his representation within a period of four weeks from today and within four weeks thereafter appropriate decision shall be taken by respondents 2 and 3. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is dispose of. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:13-4-2010 MNR