HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFUZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 33163 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. Petitioner has already filed a Civil Suit, O.S.No. 135 of 2011 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kavali and has obtained an interim injunction in I.A. No. 600 of 2011 on 29.8.2011 restraining respondent Nos. 3 and 4 from interfering with petitioner’s possession over the schedule property. While the said injunction is subsisting, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition alleging that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 with the assistance of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have interfered with the petitioner’s possession and cut the standing crop and that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are proclaiming that the land of the petitioner is a Government land and that he will be evicted. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed copies of press reports in support of the said allegation and seeks a Mandamus to declare that action of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in interfering with the petitioner’s possession at the instance of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is illegal. I am unable to appreciate the petitioner’s allegations inasmuch as against respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the petitioner has already obtained temporary injunction, which is operating since August, 2011 and so far as respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, except the press reports, there is no other material to substantiate the allegations against them. It is well settled that press reports cannot be treated as a piece of evidence for the purpose of taking cognizance of an allegation. If the petitioner so chooses, he has civil remedies to proceed against respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The mandamus sought for on the allegations as made in the present writ petition is totally mis-conceived. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________________ VILAS V. AFUZULPURKAR,J DATE: 16th December, 2011 pnb