IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11091 of 2009 Between: G. Pentaiah S/o. G. Mallaiah R/o. Kothalabad Village , Koilakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Smt. Ballem Madhanamma W/o B. Nagayya R/o. Mulchurkonda Village, Koilakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar 2 Anantha Padmanabham S/o. Not known C/o. Kiolakonda MRO Offi e, Koilakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar 3 Kothur Konda Reddy S/o. K. Thippa Reddy R/o. Vinjamoor Village, Koilakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 4 Superintendent of Police Mahaboobnagar, Mahaboobnagar District, Mahaboobnagar, 5 Sub-Inspector of Police Koilakonda Police Station Mahaboobnagar District 6 The District Collector, Mahaboobnagar District. 7 The Revenue Divisional Officer Kiolakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar 8 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kiolakonda Mandal, Mahaboobnagar ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.POTTIGARI SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R: In this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of respondents 4 to 8 in proceeding against respondents 1 to 3 for alleged acts of forgery indulged in by them for creating title deeds and pattadar passbooks in respect of Ac.1.20 gts in Survey No.91/A of Kothalabad Village, Koilakonda Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner filed report dated 08-05-2009 of Tahsildar, Koilakonda sent to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar, who are respondents 8 and 7 respectively, wherein it is stated that the verification of records revealed that false entries were recorded regarding mutation of name of respondent No.1, and accordingly he requested for restoration of entries in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner moved respondents 4 and 6 with copies marked to respondent No.5 to initiate action against respondents 1 to 3 for allegedly indulging in fabrication of record. As no action was forthcoming from the said respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.5, who is the Sub-Inspector of Police, Koilakonda Police Station, he stated that he has not received alleged complaint dated 20-04-2009, said to have been sent by the petitioner to respondents 4 and 5, and that the petitioner never approached him with the alleged complaint. The petitioner has not filed proof of receipt of complaint by respondent No.5. Therefore, no finding can be rendered by this Court as to whether the complaint was received by respondent No.5 or not. The petitioner is, therefore, permitted to file a fresh complaint before respondent No.5. If such a complaint is received by him, respondent No.5 shall take action in accordance with law. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No. 14245 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th June, 2009 vrn