HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PEITITON No. 22610 OF 2010 Dated 9th September, 2010 Between: Kudumula Sarojanamma, w/o late Krishnaiah, aged about 47 years, Vaviletipadu Village, Nellore Mandal, Nellore Distrit and another ………Petitioners And The Collector, SPSR Nellore District, Nellore and two others ………..Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri Suresh Kumar Potturi Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in acting on representation dated 16-08- 2010 submitted by the petitioners and in restraining respondent No.3 from entering their house situated in Survey No. 168 in Vaviletipadu Village, Nellore Mandal and District as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners sought for a consequential direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take immediate action on their representation. I have heard Sri Suresh Kumar Potturi, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. The petitioners claim to be conferred with ownership rights of house site by respondent No.2 on 30-04-2006. The petitioners alleged that on 14-08-2010 respondent No.3 who is a neighbouring landowner has trespassed into their property and tried to encroach into the same by merging into their land. They further pleaded that on 16-08-2010, they made a representation to respondent No.2 and have approached this Court by way of the present writ petition on the ground that no action has been taken by respondent No.2. In my opinion, this writ petition is wholly misconceived. The responsibility of respondent No.2 comes to an end with his granting assignment. After the grant of assignment, it is the responsibility of the assignee to protect his property. If his right to enjoyment is attempted to be infringed by a third party, he is entitled to invoke common law remedies. Neither respondent No.1 nor respondent No.2 are entitled to interfere in the civil disputes pertaining to the property rights between two private individuals. It is only the courts constituted for the purpose of adjudication of such disputes are entitled to entertain and adjudicate the disputes. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedies. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP No. 28827 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated: 9th September, 2010 ks