Thirumala Engineering College, v. The Government Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Principal

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.26851 of 2014 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 2.

The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under:- "... to issue any Writ, order or direction more especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 & 3 in failing to Register the Complaint of the Petitioner Dt.03.09.2014 for taking action against the Respondents 4 & 5 and their Men is illegal, arbitrary, un Constitutional and contrary to Law and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to forthwith Register the Complaint submitted to them by the Petitioner on 03.09.2014 and to Investigate for taking action in accordance with Law and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3.

Learned Government Pleader placed on record the written instructions, dated 17.12.2019, issued by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Korutla Police Station, Karimnagar District. 4.

From a perusal of the said written instructions, it is revealed that one Ahmed Abdul Muqeem i.e., the G.P.A. holder of the petitioner, lodged a complaint stating that he purchased the property admeasuring Ac.6.00 guntas in Sy.No.1302/1 and Ac.1.25 guntas in Sy.No.1303, which is a compact block comprising of Ac.7.25 guntas at Korutla shivaru. The 4th respondent is raising all sorts of obstructions in their work. On receipt of the said complaint, an entry was made in the General Diary of the Station and enquiry was conducted. During the course of enquiry, a letter was addressed to the

Tahasildar, Korutla, and summoned both the parties before the Tahasildar with a request to visit spot and cause enquiry. After obtaining report from the Tahasildar, the petition/complaint of the petitioner was closed as the matter is civil in nature. 5.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that no further cause would survive in the writ petition. However, if the petitioner has got any disputes with the respondents 4 and 5, he has to work out his remedies before the competent civil Court. Further, if the petitioner is having any objections to the orders passed by the Tahasildar, Korutla, it is open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps, as per law.

6.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J 19th December 2019 mar