THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.14209 of 2009 Dated 25th July, 2011 Between: Gantasala Vishnu Murthy and others …Petitioners And The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District, Eluru and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Ms.G.Sindhu For Sri K.Chidambaram Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 10: Sri Karri Srinivas For Sri M.V.S.Suresh Kumar The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in interfering with the civil disputes pertaining to Acs.7.98 cents in Survey Nos.78/2, 62/4, 77 and 78/1 of Kalakurru Village, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District as illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioners sought for a consequential direction to the respondents not to interfere with their possession and enjoyment of the said land. From the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is evident that a civil dispute is pending in O.S.No.905 of 2008 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Eluru filed by the petitioners against respondents Nos.5 to 10. While it is the case of the petitioners that temporary injunction was granted in I.A.No.5561 of 2008 in their favour, it is the case of respondent Nos.5 to 10 that the said temporary injunction order pertains to the lands, which are unconnected with the subject matter of this writ petition. Be that as it may, the main grievance of the petitioners is that the police are interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the land in question. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, who is the Sub- Inspector of Police, Eluru Rural Police Station, it is inter alia averred that on the requisition given by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Eluru for giving protection to the original assignees, namely, respondent Nos.5 to 10, respondent No.3 has provided protection to the said private persons in respect of the land in Survey No.78/2B, 62/4C, 78/2A, 78/1C, 62/4B and 78/1B of Kalakurru Village, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District. It is further stated that except providing protection, the police have not interfered with the civil disputes and the petitioners’ possession of the land at any point of time. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home explained the expression “protection was given” by stating that while purporting to give such protection, the police have not sought to dispossess the petitioners from the lands in question. As noted above, there are civil disputes between the parties and the interim orders in the civil suit and W.P.No.3407 of 2010 are subsisting. It is therefore appropriate and desirable that the police do not interfere with such civil disputes unless they are specifically directed so by any competent Court of law. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.18619 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 25th July, 2011 VGB