Bhadradri Kothagudem Distri v. Secretariat. Hvderadad.'

srinivasanasar colonv, F;dc# tilh "Jio"rr,r5io"r, Bhadradri Kothasudem ,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, decraring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in taking action against the 3rd respondent for causing interference in the civir disputes pending between the petitioner and the unfficial respondents in o.s.No. 241. of 2016 0n the fire of the principar Junior civir Jdge, Kothagudem wherein ad-interim injunction orders are subsisting in r.A.l.ro. 3() of 2016, inspite of the repeated visits as being ifiegat, arbitrary and unconstitutionar and oonsequentry direct the 2nd respondent to take action against the 3rd respondent for causing his interference in civir disputes in any manner pursuant to the representation dt.31-12-2016 l.A NO: I Of:201 7 MP. NO: 10280 0F 2017t Petitioq under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 herein to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent pursuant to the representation dt.

31-12-2016 and to see that he shall not cause his interference in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents in any manner including the personal life and liberty of the petitioner pending disposal of the main Writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. PRAVEEN KUMAR VEERJALA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. lto3: SRI ANIKETH REODY, AGp FOR HOME Counsel for tthe Respondent Nos. 4&5:- The Court marde the folloring: ORDER 1 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJT VRIT PETITION No.8322 OF 2017 ORDBN: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the follo*itg relief/s:- \ \ "...to issue an appropriete Writ, Order or Direction, mote particulady one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in taking acdon against the 3rd respondent fot causing interference in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofFrcial respondents in O.S.No.

241 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Koth4gudem wherein ad-interirn iniunction otders are subsisting in t.A.No. 340 of 2016, inspite of the repeated visits as being illegal, arbitrarv and unconstinrdonal and consequendy direct the 2nd respondent to ake acdon against the 3rd respondent for causing his interference in civil disputes in any menner Pu$u4nt to the r€Pr.esentation dt3l-12-2016 and to grant. . .."

2. Heard Mr.Praveen Kumar \ree{ala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Goverrunent Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in this Writ peridon does not suwive for adiudication and seeks to dismiss this Writ Petition as infructuous.

4. Learned Assistant Gor.'ernment Pleader takes no obiection to the same. 2

9n" 9'? to SRl. PRAVEEN KUMAR_VEERJALA, Advocate [OpUC]

Two ctls to GPfoR HOME ,High court for the state of reirangan'a at 3. Two CD Copies Hydercbad [OUTI BM PMK )W HIGH COURT r-l 0410912025 ti STA nJ' C,o 0 6 ttu ?tt2$ (:: * 'lii. CIit l=tl WP.No.8322 ot 2017 I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WTHOUT COSTS 7cb