The High Court · 2025

..,..RESPONDENTS Petition Under Articre 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.3 and 4 in interfering with the ctvil disputes pending between the petitioner and the respondents No 5 and 6 is illegal, arbitrary and un con stitutiona I consequen y direct the resp,ondents 3 and petitioners over the property. 4 not to interfere with the possession of the I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Ltnder section 151 cpc praying that rn the :rrcumstances stated in the affidavit firec in support of the petition, the High ccurt may be preased to issue lnterim directions to the respondents No. 3 & z. not to interfere and pressurize the petitioner to setue the civir dispute with the respondents No 5 & 6 pending disposal of the writ petrtion I.A.NO:2 OF 2025 Petition Under section i s'1 cpc prayrng that in the c ircumstances staled in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High cor, rt may be preased to issue lnterim directrons to the respondents No. 3 & 4, nct to interfere with the possession of the petitioners property i.e., land admeasrrring Ac 1.1_22 gts in sy No65 and others Sy No's. 63 to 65 &6r toa73 and sy No.s 6;3 to 65 & 67 to 73 Iand admeasuring Ac.12.16gts, situated at Nelapafla .,/illage of Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhovanagiri District pending disposal of thr: writ petition Counsel for the petitioners : SRI RAJAGOPALLAVAN TAy Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Gp FOR HOME r Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 : _ The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER { THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24482 of 2025 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and M'Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. With their consent this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. 2 This writ petition is filed seeking following prayer:- "to declare the action of the respondents Nos.3 and 4 in interfering uith the ctuil disputes peruding between the petitioner and the respondent Nos.S and 6 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional consequently direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 not to interfere utith the possession of the petitioners ouer the propertA and be pleased."

3. The facts of the case in brief are that petitioqer No.1 claims to be owner of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 1L-22 gtntas in Sy.No.65, Sy.Nos.63 to 65 and 67 to 73, situated at Nelapatla Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District purchased through a registered sale deed bearing document No.358/1983 dated 04.O4.1983. Out of the said land Petitioner No.1 along with his brother alienated the land admeasuring Ac.1- OO guntas in favor of one Sudershan vide registered sa'le deed. Similarly, Petitioner No.2 and his brother are owners of land admeasuring Ac.L2-16 guntas acquired through a declaratory 2 decree in OS.No.485 of 1988 dated 26.08.1988. Since then, petitioners Erre tn peaceful possession of thr.:ir orvn subject property 4 . Learned Counsel for the petitioners s .,rbmit that the respondent No.5 obtained ORC to an extent of A,c.10.75 guntas and one pullamma obtained ORC to an extent ol'Ac.4.07 guntas in respect of petitioners'property. Challenging the sairl ORC, the petitioners fited a writ petition bearing W.P.No.16'959 of 2014 and WP.No. 169811 of 2014 and the same are penrling before this Court. It is further submitted that respondent i"io.S is trving to take possession of the petitioners property w ith the help of respondent Nos.l to 4 and that respondent lVo.3 is actively supporting respondent Nos.S and 6. It is further submitted that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are continuously callin1,; fhe petitioners and threatening them with dire consequences a.nd pressurizing them to settle the dispute with respondent Nos.s ald 5. Learned counsel furttrer submits that the present disputt: is civil dispute and respondr:nt Nos.3 and 4/Police are not having anl, authority to interfere in the civil dispute. Aggrieved b5 the action of respondent authorities, this writ petition is filed.

5. Learnecl Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for responderrts Nos.l to 4 has placed a copy of ir..structions issued i I J by Inspector of Police, Choutuppal Police Station wherein it is submitted that petitioner No.1 has given compliant on O4.O8.2O25 stating that petitioner No.l along with Boddu Janardhan Reddy, Boddu Sattireddy have purchased Ac.7.O9 guntas in Sy.Nos.63, 68 to 73 at Nelapatla village. While, J.Pullareddy, Ir{.Sumatamma (respondent No.S herein) and M.Amarnadh Reddy have obtained fake ORC, as such, the Inspector had lodged FIR against the said persons in the year 2014. Subsequently, petitioner No. 1 filed Writ Petition No.16954 cf 2014 before this court and the same is I \ pending for consideration. However, both the parties have agreed that until the final order is pronounced by the Court, no one should enter the property. Llowever J. Puilaredcly, Sumatamma I and Amarnadh Reddy have plougtred the larrd and the matter was placed before the elders and thc elders advised to get the lald surveyed arrd cultivate the land as per the said survey. Based on the said complaint, responctent No.4 made CiD entry on O4.O8.2O25. After conducting enquiry, the said complaint was closed as 'Civil in Nature' on 13.08.2025 and advised both the parties to approach the concerned court to solve their grier.ance

6. In that view of the matter, since the respondent authorities have already closed the complalnt of the petitioners dated O4.Oa.2O25 as 'Civil in Nature' on 13.08.2025 and directed the .+ parties to approach appropriate forum for seel<ing remedl' AS available under law, no further orders are required in this urrit petition. Horvever, petitioners and unofficial respondent Nos.S and 6 may pursue their remedies as available unrler 1aw

7. With ttre above observations, this writ petit-ion is disposed of, accordingly. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, sha11 stand closed. No order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII SD/.7 A . SRINIVASA REDDY rlrANr REGtSTRAR ,\'_- '$."r,o" oFFrcER tariat, State of Telangana The Principal Secretary. Home Department, Secre at Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of psli6s.., _fl36hakonda police Comrnissionerate. I:l:[".9" Racrrakonda (y,;;;; b;;;;;JJii b,.u,, ,he Assisranr uommrssroner of potice, Choutuppat Foi;; Iili;;; vrirori er,Ji"nlgi,i 3. The Circle lnspector of ;iff"r#"38T3i",13fl E:,.fttffi ?i:3J3?i'",:i?:[,;nj'"3':1,,, 3 ?,13 33 3;;[:*^'AG.PALLAVAN rAyr, Advocate ropuc] To 1 SA BS HIGH COURT DATED:21t0Bt2O2S ORDER WP.No.24482 of 2O2S ,t).. sr,r';^\. - () \. 1 6 liEP 2025 I .i i/: , - | r. ;)' I DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS. Ienl a