THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1818 of 2011 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioner seeks a mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not providing police protection to her to safeguard her property from the illegal activities of the fourth respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims that she is the owner of plot bearing No.73, admeasuring 192 sq.yards, covered by Survey No.273 situated at Kotha Basthi, Venkatapuram, Alwal Village under Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation limits, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same through registered sale deed bearing document No.517/2010, dated 20.02.2010. It is stated that prior to her purchase of aforesaid plot, vendor of the petitioner was in possession. When there was interference by the fourth respondent with the vendor of the petitioner, her vendor filed O.S.No.1231 of 2008 for perpetual injunction and obtained injunction orders. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of injunction orders, as she is proceeding with the construction activity, there is interference by the fourth respondent. It is the grievance of the petitioner that although she lodged complaint before the third respondent – Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, Alwal, Ranga Reddy District, no action has been taken for giving protection. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and I have perused a copy of the complaint lodged by the petitioner before the third respondent. In fact, there is no injunction in favour of the petitioner. On the ground that the vendor of the petitioner has obtained injunction orders against the fourth respondent, the petitioner is seeking police protection. If the complaint is taken as it is, there is no cognizable offence committed by the fourth respondent for taking any action by the police. If there is any interference with the construction activity of the petitioner, it is for her to approach a competent civil Court and obtain appropriate orders. Basing on the decree obtained by the vendor of the petitioner, alleging that there is interference, the petitioner cannot seek any police protection directly. Although the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a judgment of this Court in SANGU BRAHMAM AND OTHERS v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, GARIDEPALLI POLICE STATION, NALGONDA DISTRICT AND OTHERS[1], the ratio laid down therein cannot be applied to this case for the reason that there is no injunction granted by the competent civil Court in favour of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that if there is any interference by the police, this order will not preclude the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court and obtain appropriate orders. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st FEBRUARY, 2011. kvni [1] 2005(3) ALD 772