THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2840 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 in insisting the petitioner to appear before the authority of the third respondent at the instance of the fourth respondent and give up his leasehold rights over the land to an extent of Ac.0.45 cents covered by D.Nos.228/2 and 228/3 of Burripalem Village, as illegal and arbitrary. When the matter came up on an earlier occasion, it was adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3 to get instructions. When the matter is taken up today, on instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that the fourth respondent submitted a representation to the second respondent – Superintendent of Police, Guntur, on 30.12.2010, alleging that the petitioner and others have trespassed into the aforesaid land, abused him in filthy language and beat him. It is further submitted that the said representation was forwarded to the police concerned and a case in Crime No.2 of 2011 was registered for the offences under Sections 323, 447, 506 IPC read with 34 IPC on 02.01.2011 against the petitioner as A.2 and one Ummallaneni Janaki Ramachandra Rao as A.1 on the file of Tenali Rural Police Station. It is also submitted that investigation in the said crime is in progress and the petitioner was questioned only for such purpose and respondents 2 and 3 never insisted him to give up his rights, if any, on the land in question. Though it is the case of the petitioner that respondents 2 and 3 have insisted him to give up his leasehold rights over the land in question, when the fourth respondent is claiming possession and complained as regards trespass with regard to very same land, it is not possible for this Court to record any finding as to who is in possession of the land in question. As the fourth respondent lodged complaint against the petitioner, it is the duty of the police to investigate into it and such investigation cannot be termed as an interference for issuance of directions as prayed for in this writ petition. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 25th FEBRUARY, 2011. kvni