THE HONBLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19029 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners herein claim to be the absolute owners of Ac.4.93 cents of land situated in Sy.Nos. 102/13, 102/18, 108/2, 111/1, 118/6 and 119/11 of Narasimharajupuram Village accounts, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. They ﬁled O.S.No.279 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur against one Siddama Naidu and others seeking perpetual injunction restraining them from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the above said lands. Pending the said suit, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge by order dated 3.12.2007 in I.A.No.1362 of 2007 granted temporary injunction in favour of the petitioners. In spite of the said orders, since the defendants in the suit were interfering with the possession of the suit schedule land, the petitioners ﬁled I.A.No.1363 of 2007 for grant of police aid. The said application was ordered directing the 3rd respondent herein to provide police aid to the petitioners for implementation of the temporary injunction granted on 3.12.2007. However, the 3rd respondent refused to provide police aid and taking advantage of the same the defendants attacked the petitioners and damaged their properties on 21.04.2008. Though the petitioners lodged a complaint before the 3rd respondent on the same day, the 3rd respondent failed to take any action and the defendants once again damaged the properties of the petitioners on 24.04.2008. The matter was also reported in the local dailies. Since the 3rd respondent was refusing to receive the complaint lodged by the petitioners, the 3rd petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent requesting to provide police protection from the high handed action of the defendants and their followers. However, there was no response. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 3rd respondent in not providing police protection to the petitioners as per the orders in I.A.No.1363 of 2007 in O.S.No.279 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, is arbitrary and illegal. The 3rd respondent ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit stating that in obedience to the order in I.A.No.1363 of 2007, police protection was given to the suit schedule land on 25.12.2007 by deputing required staﬀ and the petitioners cultivated the land and raised crops. A memo was also ﬁled before the Court on 25.12.2007 stating that police protection was given to the petitioners. Hence, the allegation that the respondents ignored the orders passed by the competent civil Court is incorrect and the writ petition is devoid of any merit. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents. The material placed before this Court by the learned Government Pleader along with the counter aﬃdavit shows that police aid was provided to the petitioners in compliance with the order of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur in I.A.No.1363 of 2007 and a memo was also ﬁled to that eﬀect before the Court. In the light of the said material, the allegation that the 3rd respondent failed to provide police aid appears to be unfounded. At any rate, as could be seen from the averments in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition, the allegation appears to be that subsequently, on 21.04.2008, the defendants attacked the petitioners and damaged their property. Whether the said property forms part of the suit schedule property and whether the alleged action is in violation of the injunction granted by the Court below are all issues which require consideration by the Court before which the civil suit is pending. If aggrieved, the petitioners ought to have moved an appropriate application before the civil court for necessary directions. Without taking such steps in the civil suit pending before the competent Court, the petitioners cannot be allowed to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, granting leave and liberty to the petitioners to take appropriate steps before the Civil Court, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 25.09.2008. Kgr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19029 of 2008 Between: 1 Y. Govardhana Naidu, S/o. Late Y. Nagama Naidu, R/o. N.R. Puram Village, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. 2 Y. Babu Naidu, S/o. Y. Govardhana Naidu, R/o. N.R. Puram Village, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. 3 Y. Ramesh Naidu, S/o. Y. Govardhana Naidu, R/o. N.R. Puram Village, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. 4 Y. Bhupati Naidu, S/o. Y. Govardhana Naidu, R/o. N.R. Puram Village, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Superintendent of Police, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Inspector of Police, Karvetinagaram Police Station, Karvetinagaram, Chittoor District. 3 The Station House Officer, S.R. Puram Police Station, S.R. Puram Mandal, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not providing police aid to the petitioners as per the proceedings in IA No. 1363 of 2007 in OS No. 279 of 2007 on the ﬁle of the Hon'ble Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to provide police aid to the petitioners in respect of their landed properties admeasuring Acs.4.93 cts. in Sy.Nos. 102/13, 102/18, 108/2, 111/1, 118/6 and 119/11, all situated in Narasimharajupuram Village accounts, S.R. Pural Mandal, Chittoor District, for implementation of the injunction order dated 3-12-2007 in I.A No.1363 of 2007 in O.S No. 279 of 2007 and with all other consequential benefits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: