IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14231 of 2004 Between: Bathini Kishan Goud S/o.Kishta Goud R/o. H.No.5-63, Vellulla Village Metpally Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Circle Inspector of Police Metpally Circle, Metpally Proper and Mandal Karimnagar District. 2 Bathini Raju @ Praveen S/o. Kishangoud R/o. H.No.5-63 part, Vellulla Village, Metpally Mandal, Karimnagar 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 may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in calling the petitioner regularly to the police station and pressuring the petitioner to transfer his immovable properties in the name of the respondent No.2 as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and exceeding the powers vested in him and also voilative of Articles 14,19, and 21 of the constitution of India consequently direct the respondent No.1 not to call the petitioner to the police station and not to pressure the petitioner to transfer his immovable properties in the name of the respondent No.2. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.2:--- The Court at the admission stage made the following: ORDER: The petitioner seeks a declaration that the alleged action of the first respondent in calling the petitioner to the Police Station and pressurising him to transfer his immoveable properties in the name of the second respondent, is arbitrary and illegal. The first respondent-Circle Inspector of Police, Metpally Circle, Metpally Mandal, Karimnagar District, filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations made by the petitioner and further stating that on 06.08.2004, the mother of the second respondent approached him and narrated the problems stating that the petitioner developed illegal contacts with one Suvarna and neglected his wife Bhagya i.e., mother of the second respondent. In pursuance thereof, the first respondent called the petitioner to the Office of the Circle Inspector, Metpally and conducted counseling and also suggested them to approach their caste elders for solving their problems. It is further stated that the disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent, are civil in nature and that he never pressurised the petitioner to transfer his immovable properties in the name of the second respondent and he never interfered with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent. In the light of the averments in the counter affidavit denying the allegations, no adjudication is necessary in the writ petition. Accordingly recording the statement of the first respondent in the counter affidavit, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ 04.11.2004 Note: Furnish CC in three days (b/o) VGB To 1 The Circle Inspector of Police Metpally Circle, Metpally Proper and Mandal Karimnagar District. 2 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 3 2CD copies