← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/42225/2015closed no costs

M. Ravinder Reddy, v. The State Of Telangana, Rep By Its Principal Secretary,

2015-12-29Sanjay Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 42225 of 2015 BETWEEN M.Ravinder Reddy and others ... PETITIONERS AND State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 29.12.2015 ORDER:

The prayer of the petitioners in this case is as under: "To issue a Writ, Order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in interfering with the Petitioners' right in respect of their property viz., Open plot totally to an extent of 1101 Sq.Yards in Sy.No.29(P) situated at Khajaguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal and Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the fundamental principles envisaged under the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to involve in the Petitioners' right in respect of the said property in the interest of justice."

2. As the police authorities allegedly interfered with the activity of the petitioners in constructing a compound wall, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home was asked to get instructions in the matter. Thereupon, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Raidurgam Police Station, Ranga Reddy District, furnished written instructions dated 29.12.2015 to the office of the learned Government Pleader for Home, wherein he denied the allegation of the petitioners that there was any interference by the police authorities in the work being carried on by the petitioners in the context of constructing a compound wall.

The Sub-Inspector stated that no complaint or case had been received or registered against the petitioners on the file of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, and that they may have filed this writ petition as a precautionary measure. He further stated that the police authorities never interfered with the subject property of the petitioners or visited the same. He categorically denied the allegation that the police authorities asked the petitioners to stop the construction activities.

3. The aforestated stand of the police authorities is taken on record. In the light thereof, no adjudication is warranted in this writ petition and it is accordingly closed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR December 29, 2015 Note:- Furnish copy by tomorrow.

{B/o} Lmv