IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABADERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13990 of 2004 Between: 1. Smt. T. Vimala Devi W/o. Late T. Hanumantha Rao H.No.204, Prime Sai Residency, Sangeeth Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabaderabad. 2. Sri T. Madhusudhan Goud, S/o. T. Hanumantha Rao H.No.204, Prime Sai Residency, Sangeeth Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabaderabad. ..... PETITIONERSS AND 1 The Station House Officer, Kukatpally, P.S., Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, R.R.District, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to urgently provide police protection to the Petitionerss by considering the representation of the Petitioners's dt. 2.8.2004 and consequently declare the inaction of the Respondents in considering our Application Dt. 2.8.2004 as violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India, in the Interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioners seek a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide police protection to them by considering their representation dated 02.08.2004. While ordering notice to the respondents, this Court by an order dated 13.08.2004 directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 02.08.2004 and take necessary steps in accordance with law. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police, Kukatpally police station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District it is stated that soon-after receiving the representation of the petitioners, seeking protection and stating that they are ready to pay user charges, the 1st respondent has forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent for information and consideration. Immediately the 2nd respondent called for a latest threat perception report as per G.O.Ms.No.655 in the prescribed proforma. After the necessary enquiry, the 1st respondent submitted the threat perception report in respect of the petitioners in the prescribed proforma. On the basis of which the 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 22.09.2004 directing the 1st respondent to provide general cover of protection by intensifying patrolling in the vicinity of the petitioners and by opening point book at their residence as per the need. As can be seen from the counter-affidavit, necessary steps have already been taken by the respondents. In the circumstances, no further adjudication is necessary in this writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition is closed. No costs. __________ 27.10.2004 sh To 1. The Station House Officer, Kukatpally, P.S., Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, R.R.District, Hyderabad. 3. 2 CCs to the G.P.for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.(OUT). 4. Two C.D. copies.