IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13524 of 2009 Between: 1 Gangavaram Bala Narasimudu, s/o. Ramappa, R/o. Alamuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal & District. 2 Gangavaram narasimudu, S/o. Ramudu, R/o. Alamuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal & District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Superintenent of Police, Ananthapur. 2 The Station House Officer, Ananthapur Rural and District. 3 T.Ramakrishna, S/o. Laxmanna, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 4 T.Chandrayudu, S/o. Laxmanna, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 5 Chandrasekhara, S/o.narappa, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 6 T.Ramachandrappa, S/o. Chandrayudu, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 7 T.Gopal, S/o.Chandrayudu, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 8 T.Narayan, S/o. Chandrayudu, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 9 Chandrayudu, S/o. Narayana, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 10 T.Laxminarayan, S/o.narappa, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 11 T.Srinivasulu, S/o. Late Prabhakar, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. 12 T.Krishna, S/o. Chandrasekhar, R/o. Almuru Village, Ananthapur Mandal and District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI.M.KARIBASAIAH Counsel for respondents 1 and 2: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R: In this writ petition, the petitioners sought for a declaration that the inaction of respondents 1 and 2 in registering crime on complaint dated 01.07.2009 of the petitioners as illegal and arbitrary. The averments contained in the affidavit show that a property dispute is subsisting between the petitioners on one side and respondents 3 to 12 on the other. The issuance of the pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of respondents 3 to 12 was questioned by the petitioners, in an appeal before the revenue authority, and the petitioners claim that the said order was stayed. The petitioners alleged that respondents 3 to 12 started interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the property and tried to trespass into the same. According to the petitioners, they gave complaints dated 01.07.2009 and 12.07.2009 before respondents 1 and 2. Their grievance is that neither of the respondents has taken any action on such complaint. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that while no complaint was received by respondent No.2, the complaint given to respondent No.1 was entrusted by him to the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Ananthapur for consideration since the petitioners’ grievance relates to a civil dispute. The petitioners have not produced any material to show that the complaint to respondent No.2 was received by him. Therefore, this Court cannot grant any direction to respondent No.2 to take action in the absence of proof of his receiving the purported complaint of the petitioners. In the above facts, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit a fresh complaint to respondent No.2. If the contents of the complaint so given discloses commission of any offence, respondent No.2 shall take appropriate action in accordance with law. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.17581 of 2009 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 28th July, 2009 vrn