IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 11140 of 2004 BETWEEN: Sri. Padma Reddy S/o. Srinivas Reddy, R/o. Sy. No. 371, Gowdavelly, Medchal, R.R. District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Police Station, Medchal, R.R. District. 2 Murlidhar Major, Gowdavelly, Medchal. 3 The Commissioner of Police Cyberabad, Lakadikapool, Hyd. ...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 or an order or a direction one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in compelling the petitioner to vacate the Sy.No.371 Gowdavelly Village, Medchal at the instance of the second respondent as illegal and be pleased to pass orders as the court shall deem fit. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.C.FRANCIS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: ` Petitioner submits that he has landed property admeasuring Ac.10.19 guntas in Gowdavalli Village, Medchal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, purchased by his father in 1962 and since then he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, the second respondent claiming to be the original owner of the said property influenced the first respondent to compel him to vacate the said land. Therefore, he seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Station House Officer, Medchal Police Station in compelling him to vacate the said land situated in Sy.No.371 of Gowdavalli village as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Counter has been filed stating that on a complaint made by the second respondent on 21.06.2004 claiming himself as the absolute owner of the said property and when he proceeded with construction of pillars for entrance gate, the petitioner along with antisocial elements threatened him with dire consequences to stop the construction; the same was entered into the General Diary of the police station. It is stated that the police never compelled the petitioner to vacate the said land and they never sent any police constables to the petitioner on 26.06.2004 as alleged in the writ petition. It is stated that the police never interfered with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid categorical denial of all the allegations in the counter stating that the police never interfered with the civil disputes, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent unless a crime is registered. There shall be no orders as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 23, 2008 DSK