IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6846 of 2009 Between: P.S. Malla Reddy S/o. Laxma Reddy R/o. H.No.3-8, Kapila Nagar Colony, Hydershaquote Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police Cyberabad Gachibowli, Hyderabad. 2 The Station House Officer Narsingi Police Station Narsingi, Ranga Reddy District. 3 Venumadhav Middela (Hindu) S/o. Srinivasulu R/o. H.No. LIGH 1001, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad. 4 Pavan Kumar Sankaramanchi S/o. Subbaramanasastry MIG - 816, Flat No. 101, Sai Residency Apartments, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad. 5 Ranga Babu Chakravartula S/o. Muralidhar Flat No. 104-B, Gopala Krishna Apartments, Kukatpalle, Hyderabad-500 072. 6 Nagarjuma Reddy Father's not known to the Petitioner C/o. Pavan Kumar, Sankaramachi. R/o. MIG 816, Flat No.101, Sai Residency Apartments, KPHB Colony, Hyderabad. 7 The Tahsildar Mandal Revenue Office: Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring that the inaction of the part of the 1st and 2nd respondents on my report dated 24-02-2009, is highly arbitrary, illegal against the principles of natural justice and is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and also the law lay down by the apex court in number of decisions and is liable to be set aside and in consequence thereof to set aside the same and in consequence thereof to provide sufficient police protection to the petitioner from the hands of the respondents 3 to 6 and their men. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.I.VARAHA GIRI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME ORDER: Questioning the inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in taking action against unofficial respondents 3 to 6 basing on the complaint given by him on 24.2.2009, this writ petition is filed by the petitioner. On the previous occasion, when the writ petition was taken up, the learned Government Pleader for Home sought time to get instructions and thereafter he filed a counter affidavit of the 2nd respondent – Sub Inspector of Police, Narsingi Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate inter alia stating that upon receipt of the complaint of the petitioner dated 24.2.2009, the Commissioner of Police forwarded the same to him through proper channel for necessary action. Thereafter, on 25.3.2009 he summoned the petitioner to enquire into the matter and when questioned, the petitioner gave a statement that no action need be taken on his complaint at present and if any incident happens in future, he will inform the police. In view of the said statement of the petitioner only, they have not taken any action pursuant to his complaint dated 24.2.2009. A copy of the statement of the petitioner is also placed before this Court. Today, when the matter is taken up, none appeared for the petitioner. A perusal of the above counter averments make it clear that as the petitioner himself stated that no action is required to be taken on his complaint, the respondent police have not taken any action. In the circumstances, no further orders are necessary to be passed in this writ petition and it is accordingly closed. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.15.4.2009 msv