IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4231 of 2005 Between: 1 Shaik Budan S/o Shaik Nannu R/o H. No. 4-221, Pakhal Road Narsampet, Warangal District 2 Smt. Mahabubabee W/o Shaik Bdan R/o H. No. 4-221, Pakhal Road Narsampet, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narasampet Division, Warangal District 2 The Circle Inspector of Police, Nasampet, Warangal District 3 Station House Officer, Narsampet P.S. Warangal District 4 The Forest Range Officer, Narasmpet, Warangal 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 will be pleased to issue an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents no.1 to 3 herein in not taking any action on the complaint dated 25-2-2005 lodged with the 3rd respondent establishing a cognizable offence as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of Code of Criminal procedure and consequently direct the Respondents No. 1 to 3 herein to grant protection to us and restrain the 4th Respondent and sub-ordinates from interfering with the property/land admeasuring 13 Guntas sitauted in Narsampet Abadi (Village and Revenue mandal), Warangal District, and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: It is stated that the first petitioner died and second petitioner, being his wife and the legal heir, is before this court and as such the cause in the writ petition survives. The case of the petitioners is that they made a representation before the SHO, Narsampet Police Station, Warangal District on 25.2.2005, stating that they are the owners of the property in an extent of 13 guntas in Sy.No.15 of Narsampet Gram Panchayat, Warangal and that the 4th respondent officials are interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property even after the 4th respondent lost in the legal battle and that the representation made by the petitioners dated 25.2.2005 had not been disposed of. It is averred that the petitioners are the owners of 13 guntas situated at Narsampet village and an extent of 15 guntas was allotted in favour of the 1st petitioner and subsequently the 1st petitioner gifted 2 guntas to the Forest Department on 26.5.1964 and remaining land of 13 guntas is in possession of the 1st petitioner. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner gifted an extent of 8 guntas to the 2nd petitioner (wife of first petitioner) in the year 1991 and both of them are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. While so, when the Forest Range Officer, Narsampet-the 4th respondent admittedly interfered with their possession, a suit in O.S.No.206 of 1996 was filed on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad, which was decreed. On appeal, A.S.No.78 of 2001 on the file of the learned VI Additional (III Fast Track Court) District, Judge was also dismissed, against which S.A.No.920 of 2004 was preferred and this Court also dismissed the same on 31.12.2004, upholding the judgment of the trial court. In spite of the courts holding in favour of the petitioners, the petitioners allege that the Forest officials are still interfering with their peaceful possession. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents 1 to 3; however, no counter is filed by 4th respondent. It is stated in the counter that for taking action on the complaint of the petitioner, the Station House Officer, Narsampet, secured the presence of the Forest Ranger and enquired about the obstruction with regard to the land in Ward No.15 being enjoyed by the petitioners and the court orders were also shown to him. It is further stated that since the forest officials claimed that they were unaware of the court orders, no criminal action was initiated against them. I am of the opinion that there cannot be any justification on the part of the Station House Officer, Narsampet Police Station, in not taking action against the 4th respondent, in spite of the judgments of the civil courts, which were upheld by the High Court. It is also stated in the counter that pursuant to the interim orders of this court, necessary steps are being taken to safeguard the interest of the petitioners. When a complaint has been filed against the officials of the forest department, there cannot be any abdication of the statutory obligations on the part of the concerned Station House Officer. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed, directing the Respondents 2 and 3 to take action on the representation made by the petitioners on 25.2.2005. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------- V. ESWARAIAH, J DATE: 10.3.2008 CVM To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}