APHC010307022019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 14204/2019 Between: 1. T SARASWATHI, W/O. VEERA BHASKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO. 10-1-333/8, MYDUKUR ROAD, SURENDER NAGAR ROAD, BADWEL TOWN AND MUNICIPALITY, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MYDUKUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 6. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BADVEL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 7. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA. 2 8. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAJAMPETA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 9. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, GOPAVARAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 10. PANGA NITYA PUJYA REDDY, S/O. PULLA REDDY, AGED 55 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYA NAGAR, BADWEL MUNICIPALITY, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 11. GODI RAMANA REDDY, S/O. VENKAT REDDY, THANGEDUPALLE VILLAGE, B. KODURU MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 12. KONDA SARASWATHI, W/O. NARAYANA REDDY, R/O.GODLAVEDU VILLAGE, B. MATTAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 13. SIDDA VENKAT REDDY, S/O. NARAYANA REDDY, R/O.GODLAVEDU VILLAGE, B. MATTAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 14. AMBAVRAM BUCHI REDDY, S/O. CHINNAPALI REDDY, R/O. SURENDRA NAGAR, BADVEL MUNICIPALITY,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 15. BOVILLA SRINU REDDY, S/O. MYSOORA REDDY, R/O. SURENDRA NAGAR, ASHRAMAM VEEDHI, BADVEL TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 16. SAGALA SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O. SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED 60 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.2-2, AMMAVARI STREET, KADAPA,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. K RAMAMOHAN 3. SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.14204 OF 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 and 7 in not taking action against the respondents 5 and 6 in not taking action against the unofficial respondents Nos. 10 to 16 on the representation of the petitioner Dt.10.09.2019, 09.09.2019 and 03.04.2019 by RPAD and in not registering the case against the respondents 10 to 16 is in violation of Articles 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the respondents 5 and 6 in not taking action against unofficial respondents 10 to 16 by registering the case Under Section 420 of IPC forthwith for creating forged and fabricated documents and cheating the people and pass…” 2. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Earlier, learned Assistant Government Pleader categorically submitted that it is a civil dispute relating to land, and as the both parties causing law and order problem, proceedings were initiated long back under Section 145 Cr.P.C. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that police did not register any case on the report, even though the petitioner presented report on 10.09.2019, 09.09.2019 and 03.04.2019. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions would submit that police conducted enquiry, and as the matter is civil in nature, they did not interfere in the matter. 4 6. In the light of submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Magistrate for necessary redressal in accordance with law in the light of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M.Subramaniam and Another, Appellants Vs. S.Janaki and Another, Respondents1 and also in the case of P.R.Muralidharan and Others, Appellants Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar and Others, Respondents2 7. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that nothing remains for adjudication in the writ petition, and it can be closed at the stage of admission, without going into merits of the case, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate for necessary redressal in accordance with law, in the light of the above referred Judgments. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 10.09.2025 Pmk 1 (2020 SCC Online SC 341) 2 2006 SCC Online SC 296 5 09 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No:14204 OF 2019 Date: 10.09.2025 Pmk