IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13426 of 2009 Between: 1 Vellaturi Mallikarjuna Rao S/o.Mallaiah Thumurukota Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur District. 2 Nanigama Sreinivasa Sarma S/o.Narsimha Rao Thumurukota Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur District. 3 Gorlapati Kotaiah S/o.Papaiah Thumurukota Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner of Endowments, Tilak Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 The Executive Officer, Endowments Department, Rentachinthala Group Temple, Rentachinthala, Guntur District. 4 The Superintendent of Police, Guntur, Guntur District. 5 The District Collector, Guntur, Guntur District. 6 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Gurajala, Guntur District. 7 The Circle Inspector of Police, Gurajala, Guntur District. 8 The Sub Inspector of Police, Rentachinthala, Guntur District. 9 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. 10 The Tahsildar, Rentachinthala, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.N.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for Respondents 4 to 9:AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in protecting the possession of the petitioners in respect of landed property admeasuring Acs.28.65 cents in Survey Nos.510 and 530 of Tumurukota Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners are archakas of Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Devasthanam, Tumurukota Village, Rentachintala Mandal, Guntur District. The said Devasthanam owns the above-mentioned extent of the land. They claim that they being archakas, their families have been in possession and enjoyment of the said land. According to the petitioners, some anti social elements have been forcibly preventing them from enjoying the said property by claiming that they belong to Rythu Cooli Sangham, Guntur. They averred that some of the anti social elements have attacked respondent No.3 and his family members causing bleeding injuries. The petitioners approached respondent Nos.4 and 8 for protection of their possession of the above-mentioned land. As no protection was given, they filed the present writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.8, it is inter alia stated that the petitioners submitted representation, dated 26.06.2009 to respondent No.4 seeking police protection; that the said representation was forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.8; that the petitioners submitted a photocopy of letter, dated 27.06.2009 addressed by respondent No.3 - the Executive Officer, Endowments Department, Rentachintala, to respondent No.7 and that respondent No.8 asked the petitioners to produce an order of the Court or a letter from the competent authority for the purpose of providing protection to them. He assured that if the petitioners produce relevant documents, he is ready to provide protection to them. From the photocopy of letter, dated 27.06.2009 addressed by respondent No.3 to respondent No.7, a copy of which is filed in this writ petition, it is evident that the land of an extent of Acs.28.65 cents is in possession of archakas of Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Devasthanam, Tumurukota Village. If respondent Nos.7 and 8 were not satisfied with the photocopy of the said letter, they should have sought for confirmation of the authenticity of the said letter from it’s author, namely, Executive Officer, Rentachintala Group Temple, Rentachintala. This is not a case where there is a dispute regarding ownership between two individuals. The grievance of the petitioners is that some lawless elements are trying to disturb their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, which is in their lawful occupation. Therefore, it is the legal obligation of the police to protect the possession of the persons, who are in lawful occupation of the properties from the elements, which have no faith in rule of law. Respondent Nos.7 and 8 are therefore, directed to protect the possession of the petitioners from anybody, who is trying to interfere with their possession without any authority of law. If respondent Nos.7 and 8 have any doubt about the petitioners’ lawful possession, it is open to them to seek appropriate information from respondent No.3. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is allowed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 16th JULY, 2009. kvni