THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11514 of 2010 Date:19.07.2010 Between: K.Y. Rajaiah. ..... Petitioner AND The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, and others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. G. Dharma Rao for Mr. Mavidi Rama Rao Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Assistant Government Pleader for Home Counsel for Respondent No.5: Mr. T. Rama Koteswara Rao, for Mr. B.V. Krishna Rao The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the highhanded action of the respondents in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5 as illegal and arbitrary. The property bearing No.1-1-75 and 1-1-76 of Bakaram Village, Musheerabad Mandal, Hyderabad, is subject matter of a civil dispute. It is stated that the said dispute is pending before the Supreme Court. While so, the petitioner alleged that at the instance of respondent No.5, respondent No.4 has been threatening him to close down Saptagiri theatre which was constructed by him on the abovementioned property. No counter-affidavits are filed on behalf of the respondents. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that the Police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submitted that as the petitioner has demolished a part of the property in dispute, respondent No.5 has approached respondent No.4 with a complaint and that at that stage the petitioner filed the present writ petition. In my opinion, when the disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5 are admittedly civil in nature, respondent No.4 or any other police officer is not entitled to interfere in such disputes. If the parties to the civil disputes felt aggrieved by the actions of each other, they are entitled to approach the appropriate Forum for redressal of their grievances. As respondent No.4 has come out with the stand that he is not interfering with the civil disputes, the same is placed on record. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.14611 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 19th July, 2010 GHN