IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11251 of 2008 BETWEEN K. Pedda Narayana Reddy. ... PETITIONER AND The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool and two others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. M. BALA SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: ORDER: This writ petition is filed with a prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit the petitioner herein prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the high handed action of the respondents 1 and 2 in harassing the petitioner by interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.3 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to harass and interfere with the freedom of life and liberty of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of the house bearing H.No.1-26 situated at Dhone in Kurnool District. It is the allegation of the petitioner that at the instance of the third respondent, who is the nephew of the petitioner, the respondent – police is interfering with the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent. 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, while denying the allegations of the petitioner it is categorically stated that they have never interfered with the civil dispute of the petitioner or with the house of the petitioner, as alleged. 4. Except the allegations of the petitioner, no other material is placed on record to show that the respondents are interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner. However, as it is stated in the counter affidavit that the respondents have never interfered in the civil dispute of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to place on record the said averments and dispose of the matter. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J August 18, 2011 DSK