Mr. Sri Alli Poshamallu v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in lhe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in proceeding with the highhanded, arbitrary, unilateral inactions of Respondent Nos. 3 to 7 as high- handed, arbitrary, and unilateral, in failing to consider the reBeated representations dated 22.09.2025 and 26.09.2025, made by the petitioner. without following due process of law, is violative of the petitioners fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21,25,29, and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia. Consequently, directing the respondents 3 to 7 to forthwith consider and act upon the representations of the petitionerdated22.O9.2025 and26.09.2025, and to evict respondent No.8, ftom the petitioners self-ercquired property bearing H.No. 11-234, Subhash Colony, Bhupalpally Toriun, Jayashankar Bhupalpally District, and restore peaceful possession thereof to the petitioner, and provide immediate and effective police protection, including patrolling and personal security, to the petitioner and his wife so as to secure their life, liberty and dignity. lA NO: 1 OF 2O2!i Petition urrderSection 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 respondents .3 to 7 to forthwith consider and act upon the representations of the petitionerdated2i2.O9.2O25 and26.09.2025, and to evict respondent No.8, from the petitioners self-acquired property bearing H.No. 1'l-234, Subhash Colony, Bhupalpally To'rvn, JayashankarBhupalpally District, and restore peaceful possession thenrof to the petitioner; and provide immediate and e,ffective police protection, inclucling patrolling and personal security, to the petitioner and his wife so as to secure their life, liberty and dignity. Gounsel forthe Petitioner: SRI KODARI MALLIKARJUN Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to S:SRI R. IAXMIKANTH REDDY, A GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 and 7: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.8:-- The Gourt made, the following: ORDER :.i. THE HONOURABI.E SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAM.'I WRIT PETITION No.31713 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief: "...fo r.ssue a writ, order, or direction to the respondents more particularly in th9 nature of Writ of Mandamus dectaring the action of the Respondents in proceeding with the highhanded, arbitrary, unilateral inactions of Respondenf Nos. 3 to 7 as high-handed, arbitrary, and unilateral, in failing to con'sider the repeated representations dated 22.09.2025 and 26.09.2025, made by the petitioner without following due process of law, is violative of the petitioners fudamental rights under Articles 14, 21, 25, 29, aN 300'A of the Constitution of lndia. Consequently, directing the respondenfs 3 fo 7 to forthwith consider and act upon the representations of the petitioner dated 22.09-2025 and 26.O9.2025, and to (i) evict respondent No-8, from the petitioners se/f-acquired property beartng H-No-l1' 234, Subhash Colony, Bhupalpally Town, Jayashankar Bhupatpalty District, and restore peaceful possessrbn thereof to the petitioner, and provide immediate and effective potice protection, includitq patrolling and personal security, to the petitioner and his wife so as fo secure their life, liberty and dignity......." 2 Heard Mr.Kodari Mallikarjun, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents No.1 to 7.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representations dated 22.09.2025 and %.09.2025 made by the petitioner have not been considered by the respondents/police authorities. He further submits that the petitioner has filed an application before respondent No.6/District Collector under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Ad, 2AA7: 2 which is presently under consideration. As the petitioner apprehends threat and irrsecurity from the unofficial respondents, the present writ petition has been filed seeking eviction of respondent No'8 from his self-acquirerl house property and for a direction to provide police protection.

4. Learrred Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the contention of the petitioner is that repeated representations made by hi,m were not acted upon is not supported by any material on record. ln fact, a representation was received on 29'Q9'2O25' and wten the p,olice authorities attempted to contact the petitioner, he did not cooper,ate. lt is further submitted that a similar representation was also sent to respondent No.3, and as per instructions, necessary steps are being taken in that regard. He further submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved, he ought to have availed appropriate remedies available under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr'P'C') I Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). lt is also stated that respondent No.8 (the unofficial respondent) has submifted a representation which is also pending consideration, and as there is no speciflc direction from any competent court, police protection has not been extended. Hence, the learned Pleader prays for passing appropriate orders.

5. I herve perused the material available on record. J

6. The petitioner's grievance concerns both (a) police inaction, and (b) unauthorized occupation of his self-acquired property by respondent No.8. The matter of eviction squarely fatls within the domain of the Maintenance and welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, under which proceedings are already pending before the District Collector. Hence, the petitioner must await adjudication under that statute.

7. As to police protection, while the police.have an obligation to ensure safety, the petitioner has not substantiated any immediate threat requiring extraordinary writ intervention. In light of settled legal position in Sakm Vasu v. Sfafe of U.P., AIR 2008 SC 907, and M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Ofhers, AIR 2020 SC 387, the petitioner should first pursue remedies under the Cr.P.C. / BNSS before invoking Article 226 jurisdiction. However, the respondent police authorities are directed to consider the pending representations and ensure adherence to due process.

8. Having regard to the submissions and the settled legal position, the writ petition seeking eviction of respondent No.8 and direction for police protection is not maintainable at this stage, in view of the availability of alternative statutory remedies under the Maintenance and Welfare of Farents and Senrbr Citizens Act, 2007 and the Cr.P.C./8NSS. q t ' 4

9.However,toenSurethatthepetitioner'sgrievanceisduly addressed, the following directions would be appropriate a) Respondent No.6 (District Collector) shall expeditiously consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending application under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. b) Respondent Nos.3 to 5 (Police Authorities) shall ensure that law and order are maintained, and shall take necessary action if any cognizable offence is disclosed upon consideration of the petitioner's representatio n s dated 22.09 .2025 and 26.09.2025. c) The petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate remedies under Cr.P.C. / BNSS in case of further grievance regarding police inaction.

10. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscr:llaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/- K. BHAVANI SWAMY TANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principa-l.Secretary (Home) The state of relangana, secretariat Buildings at Hyderabad.' 2 The Director General of Police, Telangana State Lakdikapul, Hyderabad

3. The Superintendent of Police, JayaShankar Bhupalaplly Dist. 4. The station House Officer, PS. Bhupalaplly, JayaShankar Bhupalaptly Dist. 5. The station House Officer, P.S. Mahamutharam, JayaShankar Bhupalaplly Dist \

6. The District Collector, Hyderabad District 7. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhupalaplly Division At Bhupalaplly, JayaShankar Bhupalaplly Dist.

8. One CC to Sri Kodari Mallikariun, Adrocate [OPUCJ 9. Two CCs to GP forHome, High Court forthe State of Telangana, at Hyderabad IOUTI

10.Two CD Copies TJ 3Y HIGH COURT DATED:2311012025 ORDER WP.No.31713 ot 2025 ,r (J T}IE f 18 I/AB lrrn 't * * I , DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS crq,u )S