IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.12030 of 2008 Between: Potineni Swetha D/o. P. Koteswara Rao R/o Plot No. 692, Road NO.33 Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commis;sioner of Police, Cyberabad, Madhapur, Hyderabad. 2 Station House Officer, Dundigal P.S., Cyberabad. 3 P.V. Noyal Raj S/o. P.V. Vasudevan R/o. Q.No. 504/A, BHEL TownShip, Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad. 4 P. Jayadev Reddy S/o. Not known to the Petitioner Plot NO.301, Soundarya Residency, Street No.8 Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. .....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 to issue an appropriate order/s or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st and 2nd respondents in not giving necessary police protection to the person and property of the petitioner by way of implementation of orders of status qdt. 25- 4-2007 in IA No. 628 of 2007 in OS No. 369 of 2007 passed by I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District in respect of Plot Nos. 386 to 395, 398 , 399, 399/A, 400, 401 and 415 out of Ac 5-20 Gts layout in Sy.Nos. 340 (Part) and 341(Part) situated at Bachupally Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, R.R. District. and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to give police protection to the petitioner on the basis of representation dt. 18-1-2008 made by the petitioner in respect of land admeasuring Ac 5-20 Gts in Sy.Nos. 330(P) 340(P) 341(P) of Bachupally Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VENKAT RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.12030 of 2008 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.5-20 gts. in Sy.Nos.330 (P), 340 (P) and 341(P) situated at Bachupally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under registered Sale Deed vide Document No.1890/98 from one Smt.Shamsunnisa Begum and seven others and thereafter, the said property was converted into 76 plots on the basis of a common draft layout obtained by her vendor from the HUDA. While so, when respondents 3 and 4 and 15 others along with their henchmen tried to dispossess her from the land in question, the petitioner filed O.S.No.369 of 2007 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, against the 3rd respondent and others and sought for a declaration that the alleged sale deeds produced by respondents 3 and 4 and others are null and void. Thus, it appears that there is some dispute with regard to the title of the said property. But, however, it is stated that the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, by order, dated 25-04-2007 in I.A.No.628 of 2007 directed to maintain status-quo with regard to the possession of the land in question. It is stated that inspite of the said status-quo order, again respondents 3 and 4 are trying to interfere with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in violation of the status-quo order, and therefore, a complaint is said to have been made before the 1st respondent on 18-01- 2008, for taking appropriate action against respondents 3 and 4 and others to protect the land in question. The only grievance of the petitioner is that police have not take any action to implement the order of the civil court. I am of the opinion that if the civil court order has not been implemented, it is open for the petitioner to approach civil court to get appropriate orders from the civil court either for police protection or to initiate appropriate proceedings for violation of the status-quo order. As the petitioner has got alternative remedy before the civil court, I am not inclined to admit the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 12-06-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}