IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18417 of 2008 Between: Kuruba Surya Lakshmi Devi W/o. Pedda Narasimhulu R/o. Marutla Colony, No.1 Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District. 2 The Station House Officer, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District. 3 Smt. Golla Lakshmidevi W/o. Nagabhushna R/o. Marutla Colony, No.1 Kudair Mandal, Anantapur 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 an order or orders or direction one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing police aid to the petitioner to pick up the orange fruits in petitioner's land in S.No.489 situated at Marutla Colony, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to provide police aid to the petitioner pick up the orange fruits in petitioner's land in S.No.489 situated at Marutla Colony, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District forthwith and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in not providing police aid to the petitioner to pick up the orange fruits in petitioner’s land in S.No.489 as arbitrary and illegal. Though no counter-aﬃdavit is ﬁled, the learned Government Pleader for Home under instructions stated that the petitioner never approached the police station and no complaint was received on 18.08.2008 as claimed by her. Be that as it may, as could be seen from the material available on record, it is clear that the dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent is civil in nature. Therefore, in case the petitioner apprehends any obstruction by the 3rd respondent, it is for her to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to work out the appropriate remedy. No costs. __________ G.ROHINI J., Dt.01.09.2008 tjs ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to the Tahsildar, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District. 2 The Station House Officer, Kudair Mandal, Anantapur District. 3. G.P.For Home, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 4 2CD copies