IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 9343 of 2004 Between: M/s. ICDS Limited, Regd. Office at Syndicate House P.O. Manipi - 576 119, Udupi District, Karnataka State, Branch Office at Secunderabad, Rep. by its Company's Manager Sri N. Srinivasa Rao S/o. Sri. N. Satyanarayana Rao, R/o. Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Circle Inspector of Police, Ramagopalapuram Police Station, Secunderabad. 2 The Sub Inspector of Police, Ramagopalapuram Police Station, Secunderabad. 3 C. Pandit Rao, S/o. Not Known, R/o. 10-3-85/4, East Marredpally, Secunderabad. .....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 Respondents in harassing and threatening the petitioner of arrest inspite of the stay granted bys the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in C.A.No. 777/2003 in C.P.No. 201/2002 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust contrary to law and unconstitutional. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.V.SUBRAMANYA NARASU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3: M.P.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER:- Heard both the learned counsel. Petitioner herein filed this writ petition seeking writ of Mandamus against the respondents herein declaring their action in harassing and threatening the Manager of the petitioner company of arrest in spite of the stay granted by the Karnataka High Court in C.A.No.777 of 2003 in C.P.No.201 of 2002 as illegal. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that having regard to the financial disputes, the petitioner had already approached the Karnataka High Court and filed C.P.No.201 of 2002 and sought interim stay. In spite of the same, by taking advantage of the fact of the orders of the other High Court, the respondents are trying to harass and threatening to arrest the Manager of the petitioner company. In the counter- affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, it is stated that the question of arresting the Manager of the petitioner does not arise and further no action has been taken by the police in view of the orders of the granted by the Karnataka High Court in C.A.No.777 of 2002 in C.P.No.201 of 2002. It is also represented across the Bar that this Court closed similar writ petitions i.e., W.P.No.9596, 9571 and 9572 of 2004 dated 3-8-2004 recording the statement of the respondents in the counter-affidavits therein. Having regard to the said Judgment and in view of the specific averment made in the counter-affidavit, as stated above, this writ petition is closed. No costs. 02—09—2004. Stv/- To 1 The Circle Inspector of Police, Ramagopalapuram Police Station, Secunderabad. 2 The Sub Inspector of Police, Ramagopalapuram Police Station, Secunderabad 3 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 4 2CD copies