Aluqubellv Maniula v. '1 . The State of Telangana, Home Department

Petition under Atrticle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declar ng that the action of the respondents 2 to 5 in collusion with the respondents 6 to 13 in not giving protection to safeguard the possession of the petitioner over the agricultural land Sy.No.234 to an extent of Ac.2.2g gts., in Sy.No.224lE to an extent of Ac.0.18 gts., and in Sy.No.226 to an extent of Ac.0.05 gts., situated n single block at Buggabaigudem village, Vemulapally Mandal, Nalgonda District in the right of the injunction decree in 0.s.No.112 of 2013 dated 29-10-2013 and atso order in E.p.No.64 of 2014 in 0.S.No.112 of 2013, dated 13-10-20'16 granted by the Learned principal Junior Civil Judge, Miryalguda and in threatening the petitioner not to enter into his property at the instance of the respondents 6 to 13 is highly arbitrary, bad and illegal. l.A. NO: 1OF 2017(WPMP. NO:51011OF 20171 Petition 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 5th respondent to give protection to the petitioner against the respondents 6 to 13 in respect of the agricultural land of the petitioner in Sy.No.234 to an extent of Ac.Z.28 gts.. in Sy.No.224lE to an extent of Ac.0.18 gts., and in Sy.No.226 to an extent of Ac.0.05 gts., situated in single block at Buggabaigudem vrttage, Vemutapally Mandal, Nalgonda District. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt p.pRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No.1toS: SRI D.PRADEEP, AGp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.6to13 : -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI VRIT PETITION No.4109 oF 2017 ORDER: -fhis Writ Petiuon is filed undcr Article 226 of Consrituuon of India sccking thc following relicfls:- "...to issue an order or direction more particularly onc in the nature of Writ of Nlandamus declaring that the act-ion of the respondcnts 2 to 5 rr collusion with the rcspondents 6 to 13 in n.i grr..g protccdon to safcguard thc possession o[ the p"ritio.r". .t'"t the agncultural land Sy.No 234 to an cxrcnt of and in Ac.2.28 gts.. in Sy.No-324/tr to an extent of Ac'0 18 gts ' Sv.No.2i6 t() an cxtent o[,\c.0.05 gts., situatcd in single block at Iiuggabaigudcm villagc, \'emulapal[y N{andal, Nalgonda-l)istnct i" tl Ugnt of the iniunction dccree in 0.S'No 112 of 2013 dated 29-10 2011 and also order in F,.P.No.64 of 201'4 in 0 S'No 112 of 2013, d:rtecl 13-10 2016 granted by the Learned Pnncipal Junior (.ivil .ludgc, Nfun'alguda and in threatening the pedrioncr -.r,rt to cnt".'i.rto lrrs propern at the instaflce of the rcspondents 6 to 13 is high\'arbirary, bad and illegal... ""

2. Hcard N'lr. P.Prabhakar Reddy, learned counscl for the petitioner and N{r.D.l)radccp, lcarned Assistant Government Pleadcr for Home appcaring for respondent Nos'1 to 5

3. Lcarned c()unscl tor the Pctitiofler submits that thc Prcsent writ petition has been fited secking aPPropriate dirccrions against the inaction of rcspofldcnt Nos.2 to 5/police authorities, who' in allegcd collusion with thc unofficial respondents, failcd to provide poltce protcction to safcguard thc petitioner's posscssion ovcr the 2 petrn( )n sche dulc I)r( )Pe rt\'. rlcspire thc subsistcncr: rl F a de cree rn O.-1. Na. / l2 ol 201:: passccl bv rhc (.'or:rt of thc I)rincipal Junior Civr I J udge, N{irv'alaguda.

4. I-carned ct>un scl furthcr submits that the pcridoner had carlicr institu tcd E.P. lto.61 al' 2014 for exccuuon of the said decrcc, including a l)ralcr i rr the arrcst and civil irnprisonment of the judgmcnt dcbtors, which rvas c.rrdcrcd bi' the cxecuting court' Horvcvcr, despitc rl're subsisung clccree and the execudon procccdings, thc judgnr-rent clcbtors orrcc again intcrfered wlth the pctiuoncr's posscssion ancl c:rused darnagc to thc Properry. Based on thc policc rcport in this rcgard, a crimrnal casc was registered anci prosecution iniuatcd. Ncvcrthclcss, the rcspondent policc authoritics, despitc bcing arvare of thc dccrec and thc pendency of cnminal procecdinus, failt:d to cxcrcisc rhcir discretion in extending necessan, policc protcction to safcquarcl thc pctitioner's lawful posscssron. Hencc, the prcscn t wrtt PCtltron rs filcd sccking appropriatc dircctions frorn this Court.

5. Lcarncd Assistant Clovcrnmcnt Plcadcr Eor Home submrts that, Pursuant to rhc polrcc rtporL, (.i/ e N0.227 of 20t7 vfr "'-7 3 registered and is ptcscndy pc.tding uial bcfore thc Court of the lcarned III AddiuonalJunior CivilJudge, Miryalaguda. However, he fairly submits that thcre are no speciFrc instructions as to v/hether any police protcction has beeo grantcd to the pctitioner ro safeguard the petiuon schedulc propeffy

7. I har.e peruscd thc material placed on record f'he essencc o[ thc petitioncr's contention is that the policc authorities havc lailcd t() provide protccrion to cnforcc and safeguard the dccree in O.-1. N-a. / / 2 of 201 3. However, it is evident from the pleadings that thc pctitioncr has not approached thc execuung couft sceking specific drrcctions for police aid ln cxecudon o[ thc dccrec. 'l'hc issue regarding whethcr a writ peutron is maintainable tt> scck policc protection for implementation oF a civil coun decree, without cxhausting thc rcmedies available bcforc the cxccuting courr, is no krngcr rcs inlegra.

8. It is a rvell-scttlccl principlc o[ larv that thc exccution o[ decrees, including the cnforccment o[ possession orders, must be sought through the procedurc prescribed under Order XXI of the Code oF (lir,il Procedure, 1908 (CI']C). Rule 32 atd Rule 97 of t 4 ()rder XXI, CP(., spccihcallv proridc for remcdies in cascs o[ obs[rrctron or rcsisltncc to c\ccr.lu()n, an.l thc c\ccuting c()urt is vestctl witlt amplc porvets to grant policc aid or Pr()tcctl()n tc) enforcc its dccrcc. 'fhcreFcrre, a rvrit pcunorl under t\rricle 226 o[ rhc (.onsutuuon ,,f InJia st'eking dirccduns f"r' pt 'licc such circumstanccs is ordinarily not maintainabie when thc protectit-rn in petinoncr has an c[lccr.r'c altcrnalivc starut()n' rctncdl' before thc execudng c<lurt.

9. A Division Bench of this ('ourt, rn Kuhbrtkal'r Padnta u' '\'tate of Telatryana l(2023) 1,\1,'f 76-5], has catcqoncallv held that a person in whosc favour a decrcc has bccn passcd must first approach the executing court ft)r intplcme ntatic>n oI thc decrcc' including any requcst ftrr policc Protccflofl, rathct than invokrng thc writ jurisdicti<rn oi thc' I Iigh (-ourt simitarlv' ia ]Iudraboina Odhela dr Others u. .\tate oJ'felatt.g,tna tf Otlrcr'r [NI;\n\JLr/-l L/()359/20231' it rvas reitcratcd that scckirlg policc protcction For cxccuti()rl of a civi-l court dccrce undcr ,'\rdclc 226, withor-rr cxhausting thc rcmedics untlcr thc CP(-, js impermissiblc. l'hc (-ourt en.rphasized that the -.4 rvrit iurisdicuon cannot bc inr'oked as a subsntute l'rrr cxecudon prcccedings

10. In light oF thc abovc scttled legal posirion, and in thc absence of any exceptional of extraordinary clrcumstances justitying intcrfercncc under Article 226 of the (lonstinrtion, this Court finds that the present writ periuon is not maintainablc.

11. I-Iowever, rhc rights oF the petitioncr are prcscrved to approach the executing court and seck appropriate relief, including police aid or protcctron, for efFcc rivc cnforcemcnt o[ the decre e in accordance with law

12. With this direction, this rvrit pcritron is disposed of. There shall bc no order as to cosrs. Miscellaneous Pe ritions, pcndrng iI any, shall stand closed. \ To, SD/. M. OSMAN ALI BAIG SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//I SECTTON OFFICER 1 . The Secretary, State of Telangana, Home De Hyderabad. nt, Secretariat,

2. The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, Nalgon 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Miryalguda, Nalgonda District. 4. The lnspector of Police, Miryalguda Rural Police Station, Nalgonda District 5. The Sub lnspector of Police, Vemulapalli Police Station, Nalgonda District. 6. One CC to SRI P.PRABHAKAR REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC] istrict 7 8 Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Copies. U" BSK BM HIGH COURT DATED:30110t2025 -*'-- u\( lrlE Si4re I I t'il,R ?t]7fi L') l. ,+ * BATC o() t \ * ORDER WP.No.41093 of 2012 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0^ I T 3 )L