Sri. N. Rajaiah v. The State Of Telangana And 8 Others
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.22030 of 2019 ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents 2 to 7 in seeking to interfere with the civil disputes and trying to settle the disputes in police station in respect of the lands in Survey Nos.21-Part & 44 admeasuring Ac.9.20 guntas situated at Sultanpur Village, Survey Nos.30 and 33 admeasuring Ac.11.00 guntas situated at Renukapur Village and Survey Nos.137, 138, 139 and 140 admeasuring Ac.132.00 guntas situated at Balapur Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as being illegal and arbitrary.
Heard Sri V. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the official respondents 1 to 6 and Sri C. Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for the 7th respondent and Sri D. Prakash Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for Smt. K. Pallavi, counsel for the 8th respondent. Counter affidavits on behalf of the respondents 6 to 8 have been filed separately in the matter. Reply to the counter of 8th respondent has also been filed by the petitioners. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home by drawing the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit
filed by the 6th respondent, submits that the 6th respondent authority upon receiving two separate petitions from 8th respondent, registered two crimes viz., i) Crime No.353 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 341 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and ii) Crime No.389 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 427 and 506 read with section 34 IPC against the petitioners and others and has taken up investigation.
By the said counter, it is also stated by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that the claim of the petitioners that the 6th respondent authority interfered with the civil disputes and thereby tried to settle the disputes in the police station is incorrect and baseless. On behalf of the 6th respondent, it is stated that except investigating into the two complaints made against the petitioners by the 8th respondent, the 6th respondent never interfered with the civil disputes and the petitioners instead of cooperating with the investigating agency, has filed the present writ petition.
The officer of the 6th respondent authority, who has made party respondent to the writ petition by name as respondent No.7, also filed counter. The learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent by drawing the attention of this Court to the counter filed submits that the 7th
respondent except discharging his official duties and investigating into the said two complaints, has never interfered with the civil disputes and has taken up investigation in discharging of his official duty only. He has been made a party respondent by name in the present case only for the reason that he is carrying out the investigation without heeding to the demands of both the parties. Recording the said submissions made on behalf of the 6th respondent in the counter affidavit that except investigating into the complaints received, the authority is not interfering in civil disputes between the parties, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date: 09.01.2020 Isn