IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19324 of 2007 Between: 1 M.Sunil Kumar S/o.M.Vaijnath Swamy R/o.Flat No.204, VSS Towers, Subhash Nagar Shantha Nagar, Hyderabad 2 T.Uma Maheshwar Reddy s/o.Ramdas Reddy R/o.House No.3-9-38/3/A, Plot No.69, Road No.5, Central Bank Colony, Chandrapuri L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad-500068 3 V.Ravinder S/o.Vijaynath R/o.House No.14-11-726 Birban Bagh, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Station House officer, L.B.Nagar Police station,Hyderabad 2 K.Srinivas Reddy S/o.Pratap Reddy R/o.Flat No.101,Blue Moon Residency, Hindi Nagar, Panjagutta,Hyderabad 3 K.Linga Reddy S/o.Varada Reddy R/o.Angadi Kistapur Village, Jadadevpur Mandal, Medak District 4 Shaik Khasim Peera S/o.Dariya Hussain R/o.Elchur village, Samatha Mogulur Mandal, Medak District .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SHAFATH AHMED KHAN Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4: None appeared. The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in summoning the petitioners to the Police Station and interfering with the civil dispute between the petitioner’s on the one side and respondent Nos.2 to 4 on the other, pending in O.S.No.1643 of 2007 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar, as illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. On 29-04-2007, this Court placed on record the statement of the learned Government Pleader for Home that respondent No.1 is not interfering with the civil dispute between the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 to 4. Though time was taken for filing counter, no counter- affidavit has been filed so far. Though notices on respondents No.2 to 4 are not served, I do not feel it necessary to keep the Writ Petition pending on this ground. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home reiterated the submission made earlier that respondent No.1 is not interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 to 4. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of placing on record the said statement of the learned Assistant Government Pleader and with liberty to the petitioners to avail their remedy, if respondent No.1 again interferes in civil dispute in future. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.24840 of 2007 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 18th April, 2008 lur