IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 7131 of 2009 Between: Dasari Saidulu (Hindu) S/o.Ramulu R/o.Manchikallu Village, Rantachintala (M), Guntur Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Election Commissioner Andhra Pradesh State Hyderabad. 2 The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by The District Collector Guntur. 3 The Superintendent of Police Guntur. 4 Gogula Seetha Reddy (Hindu) S/o. Peda Pulla Reddy R/o. Manchikallu Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents No.1 to 3 herein in not passing orders withdrawing the Gunmen provided to the 4th respondent herein who are creating terror among villagers of Manchikallu supporters of Telugu Desam Party by preventing them in exercising their franchise at the ensuing Assembly Elections of Macherla Constituency and parliamentary Elections of Narasaraopeta Parliamentary seat as being illegal, unjust and arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner :MR.E.V.BHAGIRATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.NIRANJAN REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 in not passing orders withdrawing the Gunmen provided to the 4th respondent who is creating terror among villagers of Manchikallu, supporters of Telugu Desam Party by preventing them in exercising their franchise at the recently completed Assembly Elections of Macherla Constituency and Parliamentary election of Narasaraopeta Parliamentary seat as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 2. While at the time of admitting, by its order dated 17-04-2009 this court, inter alia, directed respondents 2, 3 and 5 to file their counter within one week from the date of the order explaining under what circumstances gunmen were provided to the 4th respondent at state’s cost. Respondents 3 and 5 have filed their counter affidavits. 3. The 5th respondent i.e. Additional Director General of Police, Hyderabad, in the counter stated that during the relevant period, as was threat perception, basing on report of the Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Intelligence, in the year 2006, on payment basis the 4th respondent was provided security and the same was reviewed and continued by the Security Review Committee 2007, 2008 basing on the threat perception from Maoists and his political opponents. It is further submitted that the security was provided to the respondent No.4 on payment basis when he stays in Mandal head quarters only as per the decision of the SRC-2008 dated 27th and 28th June-2008. As per the instructions of Government, the Security was extended to 4th respondent for six months beyond November, 2008 at the state’s cost and the extension period expired by 02-05-2009. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent after expiry of the extension period of providing security has withdrawn the security facility to the 4th respondent. 4. Having regard to the orders passed by this court on 17-04-2009 and as elections were also over, we do not see any ground to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ VILAS.V.AFZUL PURKAR, J June 29, 2009. DSH