IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19495 of 2007 Between: Smt.Golla Mahadevamma W/o.late Venkateswarlu Byatholi village, C.Belagal Mandal Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool District at Kurnool. 2 The Sub Inspector of Police-cum-S.H.O. C.Belagal Police Station, at C.Belagal, Kurnool District. 3 Mr.G.Govindu S/o.Ramanna Byatholi village, C.Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District. 4 Mr.G.Panduranganna S/o.Balkuni Ramanna Byatholi village, C.Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 and 4: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in particular respondent No.2, in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s land admeasuring Ac.3-27 cents comprised in Survey No.552 of Burandoddi Village, as illegal, high handed, arbitrary and without any authority of law. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. In pursuance of the direction given by this Court, the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool District, filed a report, in which he narrated the existence of civil dispute pertaining to a cart track between the petitioner and other villagers including respondent Nos.3 and 4. He stated in the report that on the complaint given by the villagers, respondent No.2 visited the village and disputed rastha site, and tried to persuade the petitioner and the other villagers to settle the issue amicably. It is further stated that when the dispute did not subside, respondent No.2 advised the villagers to approach a competent civil Court for resolution of the dispute. He denied interference by respondent No.2 with the private dispute between the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4. The contents of the above-mentioned report are taken on record, and the Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.25081 of 2007 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 18th April, 2008 lur