IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA WRIT PETITION NO : 4998 of 2005 Between: Smt.Pilli Premakumari, W/o.Mylabhula Martin Henry, Daniel Street, 31st Ward, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of police, Eluru, West Godavari District. 2 The Deputy Superintendent of police, Narasapur, West Godavari District. 3 The Circle Inspector of police, Bhimavaram Circle, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 4 The Station House officer, I Town police station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 5 Muvvala Yesteru Rani, W/o.Muvvala John Wilson, .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the Respondents 1 to 4 herein interfering with my life and liberty and the civil disputes by interfering with the construction of the building in an ext. of 154.06 sq. yards of the site in S.No.561/2 of Bhimavaram, west Godavari District after obtaining necessary permission from the concerned Municipality as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art.14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4: GP FOR HOME The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORAL ORDER: Heard both sides. Perused the material placed before me. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 3 and 4 have been interfering with the construction work of the petitioner at the instance of the fifth respondent. The truth or otherwise of the averments is not known. In fact, it is to be investigated into by respondents 3 and 4. However, in so far as the writ petition against the first respondent is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner volunteers to withdraw the same against the first respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition as against the first respondent is dismissed as withdrawn. In so far as the writ petition against the respondents 3 and 4 is concerned, it is incumbent upon them not to interfere with the private disputes. If there is any complaint against the petitioner, they have to make necessary investigation by registering a crime and proceed in accordance with law. Except the procedure contemplated under the law, no other action they should initiate. They must adhere strictly to the rule of law. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. ------------------------- kvsn 14-03-2005 To 1 The Superintendent of police, Eluru, West Godavari District. 2 The Deputy Superintendent of police, Narasapur, West Godavari District. 3 The Circle Inspector of police, Bhimavaram Circle, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 4 The Station House officer, I Town police station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 5 Muvvala Yesteru Rani, W/o.Muvvala John Wilson, 6 Two CCs to the GP for Home, High Court buildings, Hyderabad. 7 Two CDs.