Ambala Rama Rao v. The State of Telangana
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home subrnits that respondent No. 2 has never interfered in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofftcial respondents, as alleged in the writ petition. He further contends that the allegations made by the petitioners are vague, devoid…
Judgment
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITIO N NO: 41914 OF 2017 Between:
Ambala Rama Rao, S/o. Nagaiah, 49 years' Occ Agriculrurist' r/o H No 2-10, Chegomma village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District.
lrukulapati Veerabhadram, S/o. Kotaiah, 54 yrs, Agriculrurist, r/o. H.No'1-48, Chegomma village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District.
lrukulapati Babu Rao, S/o. Kotaiah, 52 years, Agriculturist' r/o. H.No 'l-47, Chegomma vrllage, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 3 4 The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. The Station House Officer, Kusumanchi Police Station, Kusumanchi, Khammam District. Itukulapati Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Janardhan Rao,.4.6.years, Agriculturit, r/o. H.No. i-5'1 , Chegomma village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District. lrukulapati Ramesh, S/o. Janardhan Rao, 44. years, Agrilulturit, r/o H No' '1-51 , Chegomma village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 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 appropriate writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioners and the respondents 3 and 4 even though the same were ceased by the competent civil court in os No.390i2O14 on the file of Principal Junior civil Judge, Khammam filed by the respondents 3 and 4 and directing the petitioners not to conduct agricultural operations, as being illegal, arbitrary and is in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play apart from being in violation of established judicial precedents and c:r nsequently direct the 2nd respondent herein not to interfere with the civil c isputes between the petitioners and the respondents 3 and 4 herein by interfr: ing with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands belonging to the pet tioners situated in Sy.
Nos. 584, 586 and 587 of Chegomma village, Kusumnac:l i Mandal, Khammam District l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP NO: 51980 OF 20171 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r i cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High Cou t may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the civil r isputes between the petitioners and the respondents 3 & 4 herein by interfe - rg with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands belonging to the pe.i ioners situated in Sy. Nos. 584, 586 and 587 of Chegomma village, Kusumnacl tVIandal, Khammam District, pending the disposal of the above Wp Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V BRAHMAIAH CHOWDAT y (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: SRI M. SRINIVAS \cp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 : --- The Co'urt made the following: ORDER l 'l u I i THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI{ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.41914 oF 2Ol7 :;.;', gi:j ORDER: This Writ Petition is hled with the following reiief: "...to issue ar appropriate writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus, declaring lhe action of the 2nd respondent in interfering with the civil disputes between the.petitioners arrd the respondents 3 arrd 4 even though the same were ceased by the competent Civil Court in OS No.390/2O14 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Khammam hled by the respondents 3 and 4 and directing the petitioners not to conduct agricultural operations, as being illegal, arbitrary a-nd is in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play apart from being in violation of established judiciat precedents and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein not to interfere with the civil disputes between ttre petitioners and the respondents 3 and 4 herein by interfering with the peaceful possession and enjo5rment of the lands belonging to the petitioners situated in Sy. Nos. 584, 586 and 587 of Chegomrna village, Kusumnachi Maldal, Khammam District, and pass...."
2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioners'
3. Heard Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. I and 2.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home subrnits that respondent No. 2 has never interfered in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofftcial respondents, as alleged in the writ petition. He further contends that the allegations made by the petitioners are vague, devoid of specific particulars, and unsupported by any materia,l evidence. Accordingly, he prays that the writ petition be dismissed. ,i: -P 2
I have perused the materia-l available on recoll
Having considered the assertions made by t re petitioners and the limited role of the police authorities ir matters of a purely civil nature, this Court is of th.e view that ,J Le respondent police authorities must exercise due restraint. A: :ordingly, the respondent police are directed to refrain from inl t rfering in the civil disputes between the petitioners and 11e unofflcial respondents, except in strict accordance with law.
With this direction, this q,rit petition is dis1r, sed of- There shal1 be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if aly, shall tand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.K.BHAVANI SWAMY IJ STANT REGISTRA& SECTION OFFICER AS\l \i To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretari r Buildings, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
2. The Station House Officer, Kusumanchi Police I tation, Kusumanchi, Khammam District.
3. One CC to SRI V BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY, Advoca r [OPUCI 4. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME , High Court for the State r f Telangana. [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies PVL CP HIGH COURT DATED:0711012025 ORDER WP.No.41914 of 2017 1l ES;)i ( l IAl'l (-\ ( * '.,,-19'r' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (-- .A 2
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.