M.Hanumanthu v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Its Principal

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 6038 of 2016 ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent No.3 in interfering with civil dispute in respect of an extent of Ac.3.34 cents of land in survey No.89-3B situated in Kakkalapalli village Rudrampeta Revenue Division, Anantapur District, which is the subject matter of Original Suit No.486 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapur, at the instance of respondents 4 to 9 are illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the State of Andhra Pradesh appearing for respondents 1 to 3.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he along with 8 others filed Original Suit No.486 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapur against respondents 4 to 9 seeking permanent injunction in respect of an extent of Ac.3.34 cents of land in survey No.89-3B situated at Kakkalapalli village Rudrampeta Revenue Division, Anantapur District, and during pendency of the suit, respondent no.3, at the instance of respondents 4 to 9, is calling them to police station and forcing them to withdraw the suit under the threat of foisting a false criminal case. A counter affidavit came to

be filed by respondent no.3 denying the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. It is said that basing on the information received from respondent no.4 through Dial-100 call, he deputed his staff for the purpose of enquiry which revealed that a civil dispute is pending between the petitioner and unofficial respondents in respect of the said land, and as the matter is civil in nature, the police suggested the parties not to create nuisance and redress their grievance in the court concerned. It is said that respondent No.3 is discharging his legitimate duties and maintaining law and order to keep peace and tranquility in the area and it is false to state that he is interfering with civil dispute.

4. Though the petitioner alleges that respondent no.3 is interfering with his civil rights, no material has been filed to substantiate the same. As stated earlier, respondent No.3 specifically denied his interference in the civil dispute. Recording the submission of respondent no.3 made in the counter affidavit, the Writ Petition is disposed of making clear that any interference shall be in accordance with law. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

______________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J 01.06.2016 DRK

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR W.P.No.6038 of 2016

01.06.2016