THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28429 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent - Inspector of Police, Alwal Police Station of Ranga Reddy District, in not taking action on the petitioners’ complaints, dated 28.09.2010 and 11.11.2010, lodged against respondents 2 and 3 complaining that they are making attempts to occupy the petitioners’ premises bearing H.No.9-107/1, plot No.40, admeasuring 37.6 sq.yards situated at Bapujinagar, Yapral, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary. Basing on the written instructions, dated 19.11.2010, of the first respondent, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the first respondent that there were no complaints filed by the petitioners as referred to above. It is further submitted that there was a complaint by the third respondent stating that she purchased a plot of 126 sq.yards for a total consideration of Rs.8 lakhs from the petitioners on 05.09.2002 and got registered the same and about ten days back, when she was out of station, the first petitioner trespassed into her premises. It is further submitted that basing on the complaint of the third respondent, a case in Crime No.607 of 2010 was registered against the first petitioner for the offences under Sections 447 and 427 IPC on the file of Alwal Police Station on 03.11.2010 and the first petitioner was arrested on 08.11.2010 and he was remanded to judicial custody and investigation in the said case is in progress. Although it is the case of the petitioners that they have filed complaints as referred to above, there is no proof of filing such complaints. On the other hand, it is to be noticed that the first petitioner was already arrested on 08.11.2010 and this writ petition was filed on 15.11.2010 after the complaint lodged by the third respondent was registered as a case in Crime No.607 of 2010. In the absence of any proof of evidence to show that the petitioners have already filed complaints on the mere allegation that there is interference by respondents 2 and 3, no direction can be given as prayed for. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th NOVEMBER, 2010. kvni