IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6584 of 2009 Between: Smt. Daruguri Suramma, W/o. Venkatappaiah, R/o. Mothepattenagar Village, Burgampahad Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Burgampahad Police Station, Burgampahad, Khammam District. 2 Danuguri Srinu, S/o. Suraiah, R/o. Mothepattenagar Village, burgampahad Mandal, Khammam District. 3 Danuguri Mohan Rao, S/o. Suraiah, R/o. Mothepattenagar Village, Burgampahad Mandal, Khammam District. 4 Danuguri Kondaiah, S/o. Mothepattenagar Village, Burgampahad Mandal, Khammam District. 5 Danuguri Uma, D/o. Suraiah, R/o.Mothepattenagar Village, Burgampahad Mandal, Khammam District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.V.RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The sole grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that respondent No.1 has not been granting police aid to protect her possession of property admeasuring Ac.5.04 cents comprised in Survey No.73, Ac.5.10 cents in Survey No.79 and Ac.4.00 in Survey No.81 of Mothepattinagar Village, Burgampahad Mandal of Khammam District, despite decree granted by the Special Assistant Agent and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam in O.S.No.90 of 2005, dated 05.10.2005, and order dated 23.04.2008 by the said court directing the police to give protection. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Burgampahad Police Station, Khammam District, he inter alia admitted that by order dated 23.04.2008, the Special Assistant Agent and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam directed the police to give protection in I.A.No.1 of 2008 in E.P.No.14 of 2008 in O.S.No.90 of 2005. It is further stated that in compliance with the said order, police protection was given to the petitioner on 24.03.2009 by deputing Sub Inspector of Police and the staff and warning respondents 2 to 5 against their interference with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the above mentioned property and that respondent No.2 has given an undertaking to the police that he will not interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the property. It is also stated that he is willing to provide police protection as and when the petitioner requires. In view of the measures taken by the police as narrated in the counter-affidavit referred to above, and the unequivocal undertaking of respondent No.1 that he is willing to give protection as and when required by the petitioner, no further orders need be passed in this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.8604 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 11.06.2009 va