Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35758 (AP)

SHAIK MOHAMMAD KHASIM SAHEB v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/30142/2024 · 2025-01-10

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010574832024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 30142/2024 Between: Shaik Mohammad Khasim Saheb and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MANIKANTA THOTA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the followingORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “….to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 5 and 6 in interfering with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of land Ac.2.00 Cents in Sy.No.62 of Ganugapenta Village, Tarlubadu Mandal, Prakasam District at the instigation of the respondent No.7 though the matter is pending enquiry before the 4th respondent as illegal arbitrary against the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of article 14, 21 and 300A Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent not to interfere 2 with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property and life and liberty of the petitioners..” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Police are interfering in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and respondent No.7. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that the Police are not interfering with the civil issued between the Petitioners and respondent No.7. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of by recording the same. 6. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Police are directed not to interfere in a civil matter and follow due process. No costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:10.01.2025 JLV 3 82 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.30142 of 2024 Dated.10.01.2025 JLV