THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28834 of 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3, in calling the petitioner to the police station, and sending their men wherever he went demanding that he should accept the amount offered on behalf of respondent No.4, as being illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims to be owner of the plot admeasuring 772.23 sq. yards in Sy.No.172/24 in Block No.1 of Ramnareshnagar, Hydernagar Village, Balanagar Mandal, Kukatpally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. It is his case that the fourth respondent is involved in several criminal cases, and is running several wine shops; as the fourth respondent was seeking to interfere with his property, the petitioner filed O.S.No.1518 of 2011 before the VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District against him; and an order of status quo was passed therein. The petitioner’s grievance is that respondent Nos.1 to 3 were repeatedly calling him to the police station insisting that he sell his plot to the fourth respondent receiving Rs.10.00 lakhs from him otherwise he would be killed in an encounter. When the matter was listed on 28.10.2011, Learned Government Pleader for Home sought time to obtain instructions. The notice taken out by Sri M.Govind Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, on the fourth respondent was returned with the endorsement ‘not claimed’. Today the Learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would state that the allegations in the writ affidavit are not true; no complaint has been received from the fourth respondent nor was any crime registered against the petitioner; the petitioner is not wanted in any criminal case; and respondent Nos.1 to 3 had neither sent their men to the petitioner nor called him to the police station to sell his plot to the fourth respondent on receiving Rs.10.00 lakhs. While, ordinarily, a counter affidavit would have been insisted upon by this Court Sri M.Govind Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that it would suffice if this Court were to dispose of the Writ Petition on the basis of the instructions received by the Learned Government Pleader for Home. Recording the submission that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not called the petitioner to the police station, nor would they call him to the police station asking him to sell his plot on receiving Rs.10.00 lakhs, the Writ Petition is closed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:10.11.2011 usd