THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.4029 OF 2010 Dated 31st May, 2010 Between: Smt.Movva Tulasamma …Petitioner And The State SHO, Mangalagiri Rural PS, Mangalagiri, Guntur District and 2 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.B.Chinnapa Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the official respondents in granting aid to protect the paddy crop raised by the petitioner in D.No.137/A, B, C & D of Nutakki Village, Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri B.Chinnapa Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.1 to 3. None appeared on behalf of the proposed respondent Nos.4 to 6 despite of service of notices on them. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the above- mentioned property. She filed O.S.No.112 of 2007 in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, for Permanent Injunction against her brothers Sri B.Mukkanti Reddy, Sri B.Sivasankar Reddy and her sister-in-law Smt.B.Vijayalakshmi, wife of late Sri B.Sambi Reddy, when the latter sought to interfere with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the above-mentioned property. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge granted interim injunction on 20-01-2009 after hearing both the parties on merits. The petitioner pleaded that in spite of the said interim order, the defendants continued to interfere with her possession of the property. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application for grant of Police Aid before the civil Court. By order, dated 31-03-2009, in I.A.No.310 of 2009 in I.A.No.671 of 2007 in O.S.No.112 of 2007, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge directed extension of Police Aid. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the said order, respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not extended Police aid to protect her crop. This Court while issuing Notice Before Admission on 23rd February, 2010 directed respondent No.1 to extend Police Aid in terms of order, dated 31-03-2010 passed in I.A.No.310 of 2009. This Court further directed the petitioner to implead the defendants in the suit as parties to the Writ Petition. Accordingly, the petitioner filed W.P.M.P.No.8168 of 2010 seeking impleadment of the defendants in the suit as respondent Nos.4 to 6. This Court ordered notice on the said application. Today at the hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has filed proof of service of notice on the proposed respondent Nos.4 to 6 vide U.S.R.No.3883 of 2010. The petitioner also filed copies of acknowledgments in proof of service of notices. Despite service of notices, none of the proposed respondents have appeared before the Court. WPMP.No.8168 of 2010 filed for impleadment is ordered vide separate interim order. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions submitted that in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court on 23-02-2010, respondent No.1 has afforded Police protection to the petitioner to protect the standing crop. She further stated that as long as the order of the civil Court remains in force, respondent No.1 will continue to grant police protection as and when it is needed. Having regard to the above-mentioned statement of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 23-02-2010, is vacated and WPMP.No.5243 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 31st May, 2010 lur