Sabbineni Mary v. The State Of Telangana,

O R D E R:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:

"To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 to 4 herein in not responding to petitioner's complaint dt.10-6-2015 wherein protection is sought to bring the petitioner's land admeasuring Ac.6-00 gts in Sy.Nos. 256-A and 257-A of Suddapally Village, Dichpally Mandal, Niazambad District into cultivation as being violative of Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to provide police aid on payment of costs."

2. When the matter is called, written instructions dated 22.06.2015 furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Dichpally Police Station, Nizamabad District, have been placed on record by the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. The said instructions read as under:

"It is submitted that the petitioner herein had lodged a complaint dated 10.06.2015 (received on 13.6.2015) with the Station House Officer, Dichpally Police Station stating that the petitioner is the owner of the land in Sy.No.256-A and 257/A of Suddapally village, Dichpally Mandal, Nizamabad District. Some local people tried to dispossess the petitioner from the said land on the ground that it is a tank land. Further it is mentioned in the complaint that, when the irrigation and Revenue authorities tried to dispossess the petitioner, the petitioner filed W.P.No.15662/2015 and the Hon'ble High Court granted interim order not to dispossess the petitioner from the said land. The petitioner requested the police to provide police aid to carry out the agricultural operation in the said land. It is respectfully submitted that basing on the said complaint the respondent police entered into the General Diary on 13.06.2015. During the course of enquiry it was

revealed that the petitioner's land is under dispute before the revenue authorities. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application before the revenue authorities to Survey the said land and basing on the letter of the Tahsildar concerned the respondents police will give protection to the Tahsildar concerned for survey of the said land. The petitioner herein instead of approaching the revenue authorities filed the above writ petition with baseless allegations. The matter relates to civil in nature between the petitioner and the Irrigation and Revenue authorities, for which this respondent police nothing to do with it. The petitioner unnecessarily involving the police into civil litigation."

3. On noticing the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has requested this Court to dispose of the writ petition by recording the said written instructions.

4. In view of the above submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of, by recording the written instructions dated 22.06.2015 furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Dichpally Police Station, Nizamabad District. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J Date:25.08.2015 grk

Dated 25th August, 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR

THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Between:

Sabbineni Mary D/o Late Julaiah, Aged 59 years, Occ: Retired Government Servant, R/o H.No.16-1-24/208/103, North East Residency, Saidabad Colony, Hydedrabad, represented by her Attorney S.Dhanraj S/o Late Julaiah, aged 55 years, Occ: Pastor, R/o Dichpally (V &M), Naziabad District.

... Petitioner and The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and four others.

... Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 25th August, 2015 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers May be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Marked to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No

3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the Fair copy of the judgment? Yes/No