THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24224 of 2008 Dated 25th August, 2010 Between: Ananthula Ravinder Rao. …Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Venkateshwar Varanasi Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: Assistant Government Pleader for Home Counsel for respondent No.4: Smt. Shanthi Neelam standing counsel for Municipalities (Telangana) The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. There is a civil dispute between the petitioner on the one hand and Ramagundam Municipality represented by its Commissioner (respondent No.4) on the other for an extent of 153.33 sq. yards of land in survey No.686/A of Jangaon Village, Godavarikhani Town, Ramagundam Mandal, Karimnagar District. When respondent No.4 claimed the said property, the petitioner filed O.S.No.72 of 2008 for perpetual injunction in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani. The petitioner claimed that in I.A.No.248 of 2008 ad interim injunction was granted in his favour on 24.06.2008. He has alleged that despite subsistence of the said order of injunction, respondent No.3, at the instance of respondent No.4, came to the said land at 5.30 a.m. on 30.09.2008 and tried to demolish the structures and that with great difficulty he has resisted the said attempt. The present writ petition is, therefore, filed for restraining respondent No.3 from interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4. Separate counter-affidavits have been filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4. While respondent No.4 has claimed that the property belongs to Ramagundam Municipality, respondent No.3 stated that on the complaint given by respondent No.4, he has visited the site and that on coming to know that the property is subject matter of a civil suit and there was an order of injunction, he has stopped interfering with the dispute. At the hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home reiterated the stand taken by respondent No.3 in the counter affidavit and submitted that on coming to know about the pendency of the civil dispute, respondent No.3 has not been interfering in the civil disputes. In view of the above stand taken by respondent No.3, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner and respondent No.4 to pursue the pending civil suit. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, interim order dated 06.11.2008 in W.P.M.P.No.31568 of 2008 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.31568 of 2008 and W.V.M.P.No.4057 of 2008 are disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 25th August, 2010 GHN