IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6021 of 2009 Between: Sikh Gurudwara Trust Board,at Nallwagu Sikh Chowni 18-1-112, Uppuguda, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad rep by president Johan Singh, S/o.Donger Singh aged about 54 years,Occ:Business,R/o.18-1-114/4, Uppuguda , Sikh Chowni, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh Hyderabad 2 The Station House Officer, P.S.Chatri Naka at Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SURESH SHIV SAGAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner, which is a Sikh Gurudwara Trust Board, filed this Writ Petition questioning the action of respondent No.2, in interfering with the land admeasuring Ac.8-03 guntas in Town Survey Nos.1 and 17, Ward – 273, Block-F of Kandikal Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit wherein it is inter alia stated that several complaints were filed against the Chairman of the petitioner-Board to the effect that he has been promising allotment of plots over the abovementioned land, which is claimed to be a Government land, and that GD entries were made on 06-02-2009 and 17-02-2009. It is further stated that the Tahsildar, Bandlaguda Mandal, addressed letter dated 12-06-2008 wherein it is stated that some local people approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad Division, representing that some illegal encroachments were coming up over the Government Land in T.S.Nos.1 and 17, Ward 273, Block-F of Kandikal Village, and that respondent No.2 acted upon the said letter to protect the said land. He, however, denied the allegation of the petitioner that he is harassing or threatening the petitioner and that he has been regularly summoning him to the Police Station. The contents of the counter-affidavit clearly reveal that there is a dispute regarding the title of the land between the petitioner on the one side and the Government on the other. It is also further revealed that no criminal case is registered against the petitioner in connection with the said dispute. Therefore, it is not proper for respondent No.2 to interfere with the civil dispute between the petitioner and the Government. If the Tahsildar, who is representing the Government, intends to protect the alleged Government property, he is entitled to initiate appropriate steps in law, in that regard. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of with the direction to the respondents not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the Government. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.7873 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 4th June, 2008 LUR