HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 17408 OF 2005. DATED 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2010. BETWEEN Purumalla Srinivas …..Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and ors ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 17408 OF 2005 ORDER: This Writ Petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus to declare action of the third respondent in opening a rowdy-sheet against the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, he is an Upa Sarpanch of Bhommakal village, Karimnagar Mandal & District. In view of some unavoidable civil disputes between him and the ﬁfth respondent, three criminal cases vide Crime Nos. 51/2005, 137/2005 and 157/2005 were registered against him, for the oﬀences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 379, 506, 427, and 447 IPC and in fact he also lodged criminal complaints against the ﬁfth respondent vide Crime Nos. 52 of 2005, 59 of 2005 and 129 of 2005 for the oﬀences punishable under Sections 447, 427 and 506 IPC and the same are pending. According to the petitioner, by mere lodging of three complaints against me by the ﬁfth respondent, the third respondent opened a rowdy-sheet against me and he is being harassing time and again. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a law abiding person and eking out livelihood by doing agricultural. It is his grievance that if rowdy-sheet is opened and continued against him, it will have disastrous eﬀect on my carrier and future prospectus. It is further stated that opening of rowdy-sheet against him was not following the due process of law. Therefore, this Writ Petition. The respondents ﬁled Counter. In paragraphs 3 to 5 of the Counter affidavit, it is stated as follows: “ It is submitted that in view of the registration of above said cases against the petitioner and also in view of the unlawful activities of the petitioner causing breach of peace in the area, a rowdy-sheet was opened against the petitioner on 24.06.2005, basing on the orders of the Sub-divisional Police Oﬃcer, Karimnagar in accordance with order No. 601 of A.P. Police Standing Orders. It is submitted that it true that three cases vide Cr.Nos. 52/2005, 59/2005 and 129/2005 were registered basing on the complaints of the petitioner and the same are also under investigation. It is absolutely false to allege that the police have connived with unoﬃcial respondents in registering three cases and for opening rowdy sheet against the petitioner herein. As stated supra, the said cases were registered against the petitioner and rowdy sheet was opened against him only in accordance with provisions of Criminal Procedure Code and A.P. Police Standing Orders. The police have nothing to do with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unoﬃcial respondents herein. It is true that respondents 4 & 6 are the son and daughter of respondent No.5. In reply to paras 10 to 12 of the aﬃdavit, it is submitted that it is incorrect to state that opening of rowdy sheet against the petitioner is contrary to the provisions of A.P. Police Standing Orders. On the other hand, the same is strictly in accordance with the provisions of A.P. Police Standing Orders and breach of peace. The purpose of opening of rowdy sheet is to keep watch over the unlawful activities of the petitioner and to prevent him from indulging in future in such activities causing breach of peace in the area. It is submitted that as stated supra, the rowdy sheet against the petitioner is opened strictly in accordance with the provisions of A.P. Police Standing Orders. As on today, three cases are pending investigation against the petitioner herein. Therefore, the petitioner cannot contend that the rowdy sheet opened against him is illegal, arbitrary. For all the reasons stated above, the rowdy sheet against the petitioner is not liable to be set aside. “ From the above, it is seen that the criminal cases registered against the petitioner are still pending investigation as on the date of ﬁling of the counter on 18.08.2005.The present position is not known. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the concerned competent authority for closing rowdy sheet opened against in his name in the Karimnagar Rural Police Station, if not already closed, ventilating his grievance. On ﬁling such representation, the competent authority shall consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, as per law. The Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ------------------------------------ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2010. Msnr