IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 23503 of 2008 Between: Ampe Bhima Lingappa & another ..... PETITIONERS AND The District Collector, Ananthapur District at Ananthapur & others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 23503 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not initiating action against respondents 4 and 5 to protect the petitioners’ possession of Ac.0.18 cents in Sy.No.58-B of Renumakulapalli Village, Uravakonda Mandal, Anantapur District, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri P.Narasimhulu, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. The grievance of the petitioners, as projected in their aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition, is that in respect of the above mentioned land, which is in possession of the family of the petitioners from the time of their fore-fathers, when respondents 4 and 5 have been trying to interfere with their possession, respondents 1 to 3 have not been taking any action. In my considered view, the writ petition is wholly misconceived because even according to the petitioners, respondents 4 and 5, who are private persons, are threatening their possession. Thus the dispute is purely civil in nature and the public law remedy of a writ petition is therefore not available to resolve the disputes between the two private parties. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail the common law remedies available to them. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.30626 of 2008 ﬁled by the petitioners for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:30-10-2008 usd