IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 20307 of 2008 Between: Smt. Durgam Ram Bai W/o. LateAshalu Dist. Adilabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Sub Inspector of Police Wankidi (P & M) Dist. Adilabad. 2 Vadloori Bakkaiah S/o. Late Rajaiah (P &M) Wankidi, Dist. Adilabad. 3 Vadloori Yellaiah S/o. Late Rajaiah (P &M) Wankidi, Dist. Adilabad. 4 Vadloori Mondaiah S/o. Late Rajaiah (P &M) Wankidi, Dist. Adilabad. 5 Vadloori Bapu Rao S/o. Late Rajaiah (P &M) Wankidi, Dist. Adilabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to call for the records from the respondents herein by issusing a writ Order Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of 1st Respondent at ilnsance of Respondents 2 to 5 herein interfering with peaceful possession of enjoyment in the lands Sy.No. 2.50 extent 9.26 Acs of Wankidi Man. Dist. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIDHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 20307 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the 1st respondent-Sub-Inspector of Police, Wankidi P.S, Adilabad District in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of Ac.9.26cents of land situated in Sy.No.250 of Wankidi village, Adilabad District at the instance of the respondents 2 to 5, as arbitrary and illegal. In response to the notice ordered, the Sub Inspector of Police, Wankidi P.S. ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit denying the alleged interference with the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 and stating that he never threatened the petitioner nor interrupted her agricultural operations in the land in question. It is also stated that he never interfered with the civil disputes in respect of the land in question. In view of the stand taken by the respondent No.1, no further enquiry is necessary. Accordingly recording the statement of the 1st respondent in his counter-affidavit the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 21-10-2008 *TSNR