THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.5549 of 2007 Between: M/s.Anjamma and other. .. PETITIONERS and The S.H.O., Pahadishareef, R.R.District. .. RESPONDENT ORDER: It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.10-14 gts. in Sy.Nos.1 and 17 of Jalpally village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. While so, some third parties tried to interfere with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in question and, therefore, the petitioners filed O.S.No.582 of 1997 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, seeking partition of the suit schedule property and to allot 2/3rd share i.e., Ac.10-14 gts., out of total extent of Ac.15-20 gts., in favour of the petitioners in Sy.Nos.1 and 17 of Jalpally village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Accordingly, the said suit was decreed by judgment and decree, dated 12-04-1997, holding that the petitioners are entitled to the property admeasuring Ac.10-14 gts., out of total extent of Ac.15-20 gts., and also directed to insert their names in R.O.R. and other concerned records of revenue as owners, pattedars and possessors of an extent of Ac.10-14 gts. It is stated that though the suit has been decreed in their favour and the Revenue Authorities mutated their names in the revenue records and there is no dispute with regard to the title of the said immovable property, some persons, with the help of unsocial elements, are trying to interfere with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Therefore, they made representations dated 09-01-2007 and 28- 02-2007 before the respondent. It is further stated that basing on the representation, dated 09- 01-2007, the respondent conducted panchanama on 09-01-2007, and on verification, he satisfied that the petitioners alone are in possession and enjoyment of the property in question. But, however, the police are not providing necessary police protection to safeguard their property. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the merits of the case. However, if the said decree has become final and the rights have been crystallized in favour of the petitioners and if the revenue records go to show that they are the owners and possessors of the property in question, as and when the petitioners approach the police seeking necessary police protection, it is the duty of the police to give necessary police protection to protect the property of the petitioners. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and dispose of the representations, dated 09-01-2007 and 28-02-2007, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 20-03-2007 Note: Issue C.C. by two days (B/o) Prv