IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.25573 of 2009 Between: Epuri Venkatarama Raju. ..... Petitioner AND 1.The Station House Offier, Rampachodavaram P.S., E.G.District and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.Babji for Mr.K.Venkatesh Counsel for Respondent No.1: AGP for Home Counsel for Respondent No.2: GP for Revenue. Counsel for Respondent No.3: --- This Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1, in responding to representation, dated 05-11-2009, of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri M.Babji, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. There exists a civil dispute over an extent of Ac.6- 09 cents of land in Survey Nos.92, 97 and 100/3 situated at K.Yerrampalem Village, Rampachodavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, between the petitioner and respondent No.3. The petitioner made a representation on 05-11-2009 to respondent No.1- Station House Officer, Rampachodavaram Police Station, inter alia stating that respondent No.3 has unlawfully encroached into the abovementioned land and that respondent No.1 may take possession from respondent No.3 and hand over the same to the petitioner. Alleging that respondent No.1 has not responded to the said representation, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. In my considered opinion, the petitioner cannot approach respondent No.1 for obtaining possession of immovable property from respondent No.3. Even if the petitioner is held to be lawful owner of the said property, it is beyond the power and authority of respondent No.1 to take forcible possession thereof from respondent No.3 and hand over the same to the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to invoke the common law remedy available before the civil Court for recovery of possession of the abovementioned land from respondent No.3. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this Writ Petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies available to him in law for recovery of possession of the abovementioned property. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.33314 of 2009, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 3rd March, 2010 lur