THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.4059 OF 2002 DATED:18.06.2010 Between: G.Sairaju .. Petitioner And The Station House Officer, Aswaraopet Police Station, Aswaraopet, Khammam District and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.4059 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner is resident of Gurrala Cheruvu, Hamlet of Aswaraopet, Khammam District. He filed the instant Writ Petition seeking an appropriate direction to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in “attempting to dispossess” the petitioner from the land admeasuring Acs.10.00 comprised in Survey No.108 of the said village, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a physically handicapped person, that he inherited the petition schedule land from Gundu Papayya to whom land was assigned as he was a freedom fighter, that he obtained pattedar pass book, loan from Nedungudi Bank and that the fourth respondent, who has no manner of right, is trying to interfere with the possession. While making reference to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.18557 of 2000 and W.P.No.6515 of 2001, the petitioner further alleges that respondent Nos.1 to 3, so as to help the fourth respondent, are trying to dispossess the petitioner. Respondent Nos.1 to 3, namely, the Station House Officer, Aswaraopet Police Station, the Mandal Revenue Officer and the Assistant Director, Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Khammam have not filed any counter affidavits. Fourth respondent filed counter affidavit, inter alia, stating that the Writ Petition is filed on a mere apprehension and that the petitioner is a name lender to his brother Balarama Raju. It is also alleged that the fourth respondent purchased an extent of Acs.5.00 in Survey No.108/29 under registered sale deed dated 30.08.1996 from S.Venkataratnam and that his name is entered in the revenue records. It is also alleged that the fourth respondent purchased the land very much prior to purchase of the land by the petitioner. A perusal of the affidavit accompanying the Writ Petition and the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent would reveal that the dispute is essentially with regard to a private land. In such a matter, respondent Nos.1 to 3 have no say. An allegation is made that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are trying to interfere with the possession only to bring it within the purview of writ jurisdiction. The petitioner’s grievance is against the fourth respondent. He may file a civil suit before the competent Court. The Writ Petition, with the above observation, is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 18.06.2010 KH