1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN Writ Petition (MD)No.2672 of 2011 Manoharan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.State through the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, South Chithirai Street, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sellur Police Station, Madurai. 3.R.Vijayan 4.V.Madhan Kumar ... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent No.2 to register case based on petitioner's complaint dated 19.02.2010 against the respondents Nos.3 and 4 and further direct the respondent No.1 to monitor the investigation of the respondent No.2 and to proceed with the same as per law within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramanian, Additional Government Pleader. For R1 & R2 No Appearance for R3 & R4 O R D E R Mr.K.Balasubramanian, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2.The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the second respondent to register a case based on the petitioner's complaint, dated 19.02.2010 against the respondents 3 and 4 and further to direct the first respondent to monitor the investigation of the second respondent. 3.The petitioner who claims to be tenant of the property. The subsequent purchaser of the said property is attempting to interfere with his possession illegally in spite of the injunction order in his favour. He would only contend that a civil suit is pending before the Civil Court as against him. When the matter is seized of by the civil court, he cannot be dispossessed otherwise than due process of law. Since the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 attempt to demolish the building of the petitioner, including the shop of the petitioner, he made a complaint to the Inspector of Police, Sellur Police Station, the second respondent herein. Since he did not take any action, he filed the present writ petition. 4.Learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner will not be forcibly dispossessed and the police has not in any way connected with such an attempt. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable. 5.At this point of time, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that suitable direction may be given to the respondents to register the complaint and monitor the same. 6.Suffice to note that it is only an apprehension of the petitioner that his property may be demolished for which he has come forward with this writ petition. Hence, nothing survives in the writ petition. It is made clear that the Inspector of Police will take into consideration the complaint dated 19.02.2010 which was already given by the petitioner and also the pendency of the civil case. 7.With the above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, South Chithirai Street, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sellur Police Station, Madurai. + 1 cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR No.5565 Writ Petition (MD)No.2672 of 2011 08.03.2011 sms RJ/29.3.11 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/