HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27048 of 2008 Date : 21.09.2011 Between : Immadi Naga Prasanna Lakshmi. …..Petitioner And The Director General of Police, Government of A.P. & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27048 of 2008 ORDER : It is represented on behalf of counsel for petitioner Sri Nageswar Rao Palle, that they have already given up vakalat and are not representing in the matter. Heard learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not conducting any inquiry and not registering criminal case against respondent No.4 pursuant to the complaint dated 25.11.2008, as illegal and arbitrary, and direct the respondents to take immediate action on the said complaint. The petitioner claims that he is the owner and possessor of Plot No.9 in Sy.Nos.27/3 and 28/3, admeasuring 384 sq. yards, situated at Nanakramguda village of Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. In the complaint dated 25.11.2008, it is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent No.4 herein is not allowing her to enter into her plot and is obstructing her by erecting a gate, as such, she has filed a criminal complaint before the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crimes), Detective Department, CCS, Nampally, but no action has been taken on such complaint. Though the writ petition is of 2008, no counter affidavit is filed, but it is represented by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 25.11.2008, addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crimes), Detective Department, CCS, Nampally, by marking copies to respondent No.2, in which, she has made allegations against respondent No.4. It is stated that the Station House Officer was deputed many times to trace out the petitioner/complainant, but her whereabouts are not known till date and she has also not approached the Police to inquire into her complaint. At the same time, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 that the lands covered by Sy.Nos.27/3 and 28/3 are notified under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and such notification is already upheld by this Court, and in that view of the matter, the dispute is of civil nature, and hence, the petitioner cannot seek any directions in this writ petition to act upon her complaint. From the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition coupled with the submissions made by the learned counsel for respondent No.4, it is evidently a civil dispute, which can be resolved by approaching the common law Courts, but such dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4 cannot be inquired into in the complaint filed by the petitioner on 25.11.2008. In that view of the matter, no directions can be granted as prayed for in this writ petition. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ 21st September 2011 R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr