IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21740 of 2007 Between: Oggu John Christopher … Petitioner AND The Station House Officer, P.S. Alair, Nalgonda District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri G. Arun Kumar Counsel for respondents 1to 3: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri Venkat Mayur This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21740 of 2007 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in interfering with the petitioner’s property bearing house No.13-154 of Alair, Nalgonda district, as illegal and violative of Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. Heard Sri G. Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Venkat Mayur for respondent No.4 and perused the record. In his affidavit, the petitioner stated that respondent No.4 was a maid servant during the life time of his father, who passed away on 11.09.2003, that he is the sole surviving heir of his deceased parents, that his mother was the owner of the subject house and after her demise on 07.12.2005, necessary entries were made in the Grampanchayat records in his favour. The petitioner claims that respondent No.4 married his father and that she approached respondent Nos.1 to 3 and at her instance they have been calling the petitioner and harassing him by detaining illegally in the police station for hours together by insisting that he should give a part of the said house property to respondent No.4. The petitioner claimed that on 06.10.2007 respondent Nos.4 to 8 came to his house at about 7.15 p.m. in a jeep and threatened him to part with a part of the house property to respondent No.4. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1 while denying the allegations of the petitioner that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4, he stated that respondent No.4 gave a complaint against the petitioner and based on the same, he registered crime No.108 of 2007 under Section 354 IPC on 14.10.2007. He further stated that except registering the said crime, no action has been taken against the petitioner and that none of respondent Nos.1 to 3 have been harassing the petitioner. No reply affidavit has been filed controverting the averments contained in the counter-affidavit. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous in view of the abovementioned stand taken by respondent No.1 in his counter- affidavit. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition as infructuous, WPMP.No.28192 of 2007 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 21.04.2008 ES