IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 24136 of 2005 BETWEEN: Harijan Chennaiah @ Kashamma Chennaiah S/o. Late Laxmaiah R/o. Mohammadabad Village, Ganded Mandal, Ranga Reddy district ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District, Vikarabad. 2 The Station House Officer, Pargi, Ranga Reddy District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents not considering and disposing of petitioner representations is illegal, arbitrary, and unwarranted and pass such other order or orders as this Hon`ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.MAHENDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner submits that he belongs to SC community and he is the owner of the plot admeasuring 37 guntas in Sy.No.398/A of Vaganchugadda situated at Mohammadabad Village, Gandeed Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. When there was interference by private persons in respect of the said plot, he filed a suit in O.S.No.18 of 2003 before the Junior Civil Judge, Pargi, Ranga Reddy District, which is said to have been decreed on 29.08.2003. 2. Petitioner further submits that he made a representation dated 30.09.2004 to the respondents for taking appropriate action against alleged respondents 3 and 4, who are said to be private persons. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken on his representation. 3. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents against alleged respondents 3 and 4, who are not made party to this writ petition and there are only two respondents in the writ petition i.e. The Superintendent of Police – first respondent and the Station House Officer – second respondent. In view of non-impleadment of the proper and necessary parties i.e. respondents 3 and 4, against whom the allegations are made, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 3, 2008 DSK