The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.8079 of 2010 Dated 7th June, 2010 Between: K.Ramanaiah …Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh and 3 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.V.R.Reddy Kovvuri Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent Nos.3 & 4: Mr.K.Murali Krishna for Mr.P.Veera Reddy The Court made the following: Order: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2, in interfering in civil disputes pertaining to land admeasuring Ac.0.37 ¼ cents out of Ac.1-12 cents in Survey No.1068 of Ukkayapalli village fields, Kadapa City and District, at the instance of respondent Nos.3 and 4, as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri P.Veera Reddy, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4. The petitioner’s vendor viz., Thellapati Venkata Subbaiah filed a suit for declaration of title in respect of Ac.1-12 cents of land in Survey No.1068 of Ukkayapalli Village, against respondent Nos.3 and 4. The said suit was decreed to the extent of Ac.0-62 cents. Aggrieved by the same, the legal heirs of the petitioner’s vendor filed an appeal, which was disposed of with certain observations. The petitioner through his vendor claims right to occupy even the balance Ac.0-50 cents also under the said decree. However, it is not necessary for this Court to give a specific finding thereon as such a question falls outside the scope of this Court. In the present Writ Petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that while he is in possession of the balance Ac.0-50 cents also, at the instance of respondent Nos.3 and 4, respondent No.2 has been frequently calling him to the Police Station, harassing him and threatening him to deliver possession of the said land to respondent Nos.3 and 4. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit wherein he denied his interference in civil disputes and the allegation that he is threatening the petitioner to part with possession of the land in dispute in favour of respondent Nos.3 and 4. He stated that respondent No.3 filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., in the Court of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kadapa, against the petitioner which was forwarded by the jurisdictional Magistrate to respondent No.2 under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., and that on receipt of the said private complaint, he registered Crime No.37 of 2010 under Sections 447, 411, 427 and 506 IPC on 03-04-2010 and investigated into the said Crime. He further stated that investigation is pending for want of some more witnesses and that except registration of the said case, he has never interfered with the rights of the parties and their enjoyment of the land in dispute. Having regard to the specific stand taken by respondent No.2 in the counter-affidavit as referred to above, no further adjudication of the Writ Petition is required. Respondent No.2 is entitled to investigate into the case registered against the petitioner and take appropriate action in accordance with law. As held out by him, he shall not interfere with the civil dispute between the parties. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 12-04-2010, is vacated and WPMP.No.10394 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 7th June, 2010 lur