High Court for State of TelanganaWP/40765/2014disposed of no costs

M. Srikanth v. State Of Telangana

2015-01-19Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.40765 of 2014 BETWEEN M.Srikanth and another ... PETITIONERS AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.

...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Heard.

2. Petitioners allege that the police officials of respondent No.4 police station, in particular, are interfering with their civil rights relating to H.No.198/h/26, 1-98/h/27, admeasuring Ac.2-00 in Survey No.68/part of Madhapur Village, Serlingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Petitioners allege that they have been pressurized by the police to settle the matter with third parties. Hence, the relief, as prayed for, is sought.

3. Instructions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader however,

show that against the petitioners, no complaint is pending on the file of Madhapur police station. However, one E.S.Vara Prasad filed a complaint on 19.12.2014, which is under investigation in Crime No.861 of 2014. The subject matter of the complaint, however, appears to be same Survey No.68/part. However, it is stated that against the petitioners no criminal case is pending and the aforesaid crime does not relate to the petitioners. It is stated that the respondents have never interfered with the civil disputes much less the claim of the petitioners and never summoned the petitioners to the police station. The instructions also refer to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Nos.16482-16483 of 2010 dated 31.05.2010 directing status quo to be maintained regarding disputed properties therein.

4. It is evident from the instructions that neither any complaint is received or registered against the petitioners with respondent No.4 police station nor the petitioners are summoned and that there is no interference by the police with the petitioners' civil rights. As the petitioners are not connected with crime No.861 of 2014, referred to above, in my view the cause in the writ petition does not survive.

Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J January 19, 2015 LMV