HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7853 of 2011 Date : 01.04.2011 Between : Battula Venkata Narayana. …..Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7853 of 2011 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the action of respondent No.2 in interfering with the civil dispute existing between him and the 3rd respondent, by insisting the petitioner to pay money to the 3rd respondent or alternatively, to execute documents in his favour. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased an extent of Ac.0.96 cents of land from Bezawada Srilakshmi by an agreement of sale, dated 25.11.2006, by paying an amount of Rs.11,50,000/- as part sale consideration. It is also stated that there was also an agreement entered by the petitioner in favour of the 3rd respondent for a portion of the said land. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent did not turn up to finalise the proposals for sale, but now, at the instance of respondent No.3, the 2nd respondent is interfering in the matter and is threatening the petitioner either to pay money to the 3rd respondent or to execute the documents by entering into fresh agreement of sale. When the matter was called on 25.03.2011, it was adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader to get instructions. Today, when the matter is taken up, based on the written instructions, dated 28.03.2011, sent by the Sub-Inspector of Police, I Town Police Station, Ongole, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that no complaint whatsoever is received or registered against the petitioner and the 3rd respondent has also not approached the Police for lodging any complaint. It is submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent is of civil nature and the 2nd respondent did not call the petitioner at any time to the Police Station or insisted him to pay money to the 3rd respondent or to enter into fresh agreement with him. Although it is alleged by the petitioner that the 2nd respondent is interfering in the matter and is threatening him to settle the civil dispute with the 3rd respondent, in the absence of any material to substantiate such allegation, the same cannot be accepted. However, as it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader based on written instructions that the 2nd respondent is not interfering in the civil dispute existing between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, placing on record such statement. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st April 2011 ajr