THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W. P. Nos.24306 to 24314 OF 2006 Between : The Property Association Bapist Churches Limited, rep. By its Executive Director, Pastor G.D.D.Diwakar … Petitioner And The Director General & Inspector General of police, Government of A.P. Lakdikapool Hyderabd and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO.24306 to 24314 of 2006 ORAL COMMON ORDER: The petitioner in all these cases is the Association of Bapist Churches Limited, represented by its Executive Director Pastor G.D.D.Diwakar. The petitioner seeks the following relief: “to declare that the action of the respondent authorities in causing their interference in the civil dispute of the company affairs, its administration works and day-to-day activities i.e., O.S.No.26/2005 Judgment and Decree for the Perpetual Injunction passed by the 1 Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, in favour of petitioner and the force to compromise amicable the issue with the 3rd respondent, as wholly illegal, improper, unconstitutional against to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to interfere in the civil dispute, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” Earlier the petitioner filed Writ petition No.22272 of 2006 for a direction to all the District Superintendent of Police, Nellore, Prakasam, Kurnool, Guntur, Krishna, Nalgonda, Warangal and Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, through the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to restrain the 3rd respondent and his men etc., from interfering with the company and its affairs and administration. This Court dismissed the writ petition recording that no writ would lie against Ministry of Home Department particularly as the State Government has not been impleaded as a respondent. Another reason for dismissing the writ petition was that a blanket direction was sought and that could not be granted. This Court observed that if any specifie plea is brought to the appropriate authority, the same could be considered for appropriate relief. Since the grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent is disobeying the orders of an ex parte order of injunction granted against the said respondent in O.S.No.26 of 2005, this Court observed the petitioner must seek appropriate redressal in a civil Court of competent jurisdiction. For substantially the same reasons as earlier recorded in writ petition No.22272 of 2006, these writ petitions must also be dismissed. Accordingly these writ petitions are dismissed. The writ petitioner is however at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. In the circumstances no order as to costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 3rd January 2007 *TSNR