IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.21043 of 2007 Between: Devavarapu Satyanarayana, S/o. late Ramayya, Hindu, R/o. Paltheru Village, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Circle Inspector, Yellamanchili Circle, Yellamanchili, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Sub-Insepector of Police, Payakaraopet Police Station, Payakaraopet, Visakhapatnam District. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam Division, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 5 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Payakaraopet Mandal, Payakaraopet, Visakhapatnam District. 6 Akkireddy Varahalu, S/o. Late Apparao, Hindu, R/o. Palthuru Village, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 5 in interfering with the Petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Property in an extent of Ac. 4-12 cents in Sy.No. 51/2 of Kanidpudi Village, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and also intefering with the civil disputes between the Petitioner and the 6th Respondent, which is subject matter of civil suits being O.S.No. 70 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili and Suit O.S.No. 262 of 2006 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili, is highly arbitrary, unjust, illegal and contrary to the principles of natural justice and contrary to Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequenlty direct the Respondents 1 to 5 not to indulge in any activity of meddling with the Petitioners civil disputes and possession over the subject matter of the land in any manner and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the circusmtances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRP.RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.21043 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 5 in interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property admeasuring Ac.4-12 cents in Sy.No.51/2 of Kandipudi village, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and also interfering with the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the 6th respondent in O.S.No.70 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili and O.S.No.262 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili, as illegal and arbitrary. Admittedly, there are civil disputes pending before competent civil courts between the petitioner and the 6th respondent herein being O.S.No.70 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili and O.S.No.262 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili. According to the petitioner, pending civil disputes, respondents 1 to 5 are interfering with the property in question at the instance of the 6th respondent. The 3rd respondent filed a detailed counter stating that both the petitioner as well as the 6th respondent are claiming rights over the disputed land admeasuring Ac.4-12 cents in Sy.No.51/2 situated at Kandipudi Village, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The petitioner as well as the 6th respondent filed suits O.S.Nos.262 of 2006 and 70 of 2007 on the file of the respective courts seeking perpetual injunction over the disputed land. The 6th respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 326, 447 and 506 IPC and the same was registered as Cr.No.72 of 2007. The petitioner also filed a complaint against the 6th respondent for the offence under Sections 326, 447 and 506 IPC and the same was registered as Cr.No.73 of 2007. In both the cases, investigation has been completed and charge-sheets were filed before the respective courts. Except registering the said cases against the petitioner as well as the 6th respondent, the 3rd respondent never interfered with the civil disputes of the petitioner as alleged by him. In both the cases, charge-sheets were filed and, therefore, the question of asking the petitioner to attend to the police station every day for the purpose of investigation does not arise. The allegation of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent in active collusion with the 6th respondent has interfered with the civil disputes and disturbed his possession is denied. In view of the above averments made in the counter affidavit and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, respondents 1 to 5 are directed not to interfere with the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the 6th respondent in O.S.No.70 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili and O.S.No.262 of 2006 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili in respect of the property in question. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 20-11-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}