The High Court · 2025

the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.07.2024, and to provide help and assistance to the petitioner for protecting the rights as per the orders in l.A.No. B9O ot 2022, passed by I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G.VASANTHA RAYUDU Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: -- The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.7182 of 2o25 / ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

2. Having regard to the nature of lis involved in the Writ Petition and the manner of disposal, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent No.4 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. Shorn of unnecessary dctails, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that despite he having an injunction order granted in his favour by the competent Court of Civ-il jurisdiction uide order, dt.22.O1.2025, IA.No.890 of 2022 in OS.No.625 of 2022 on the Iile of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial magistrate, Ranga Reddy at L-B.Nagar, the unofficial respondent continued-to interfere with his property, thereby violating the order of injunction.

4. Petitioner further contends that despite he approaching the 3d respondent-authority and submitting a representation bringing I 2_ to the notice of the authorities concerned of the interference being caused by the unofl-rcial respondent in spite of the subsistence of an injunction order, no action is being taken. F Petitioner further contends that even though he had approached the concerned Court by filing an interlocutory application uide I.A.No. 1 of 2O23, seeking for grant of police aid pursuant to the injunction order granted in IA.No.89O of 2022 in OS.No.625 of 2022 on the hie of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial magistrate, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar, the Court below did not al1ow or reject the said police aid petition, and has simply closed the sai<l petition, which action it is contended as being unknown to [aw.

6. I have taken note of the submissions made as above.

7. Though the petitioner had filed an application uide I.A.No.1 of 2023 in O.S.No.625 of 2022 seeking fo. g...,, of police aid for effective implementation of the injunction order, d1.22. | 1.2022 in IA.No.890 of 2022 in the said suit, a perusal of the docket order, dt.22.O1.2O25 shows that the said IA being closed by the Court below while allowing the IA fi1ed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC. However, the Court below, while closing the aforesaid IA filed for grant of police aid, did not record any reasons for allowing or rejecting the same. I I f 3

8. Admittedly, the petitioner did not choose to assail the said order by seeking revision of the same.

9. Though the petitioner alleges violation of the injunction order and also the 3.d respondent not taking any action on the basis of the complaint made by him, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner instead of approaching this Court by the present Writ Petition, ought to have approached the concerned Court seeking police aid for effective implementation of the injunction order grarrted by the Court below in IA.No.890 of 2022 in OS.No.625 of 2022, or seek revision of the order of the Civil Court whereby the application filed for police aid has been closed without passing aly order thereon, for implementation/enforcement of the injunction order granted by a Civil Court.

10. In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to work or,rt remedies open to him in iaw. No ordbr as to costs. 1 1. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending 1n these writ petitions shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD.K.SRTEF{AMA MURTHY PUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyde The Commissionei of Police, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. Station House Officer, Rajendra Nagar P.S., RajendraNa One CC to SRI G.VASANTHA RAYUDU' Advocate [OPU Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD Copies gar, Ranga Reddy District d, State of Telangana To 1 2 '> 4 E o ,r% HIGH COURT DATED:1010312025 ORDER WP.No.7182 ot 2025 I I flE ST4; c o^ c+ ( o I u 08 APB 2[[ : t oEserrcnr.9 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS