Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41886 (AP)

MANUKONDA SESHI REDDY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/18435/2023 · 2025-12-03

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010359642023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18435 OF 2023 Between: 1. MANUKONDA SESHI REDDY, S/o. Anji Reddy, Aged 38 years, R/o. Manukondavaripalem, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Palnadu District. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Velagapudi, Secretariat Building, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Palnadu District, Narasaraopeta. 3. The Station House Officer, Chilakaluripeta Rural Police Station, Palnadu District. 4. Manukonda Pulla Reddy, S/o. Akki Reddy, Aged 65 years, R/o. Manukondavaripalem, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District. 5. Manukonda Venkata Reddy, S/o. Pulla Reddy, Aged 45 years, R/o. Manukondavaripalem, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District. 6. Manukonda Akki Reddy, S/o. Pulla Reddy, Aged 42 years, R/o. Manukondavaripalem, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District. 7. Badduri Gopala Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, Aged 38 years, R/o. Manukondavaripalem, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 and 3 in taking the action on the complaints dt. 30-06-2023 and 10-07-2023 against the respondents 4 to 7 for destroying the boundary stone pillars to the land to an extent of Ac. 0.11 1/2 cents in Sy.No.100/8 of Manukondavripalem Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against to the principles of natural justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take action on the complaints dt. 30-06-2023 and 10-07-2023 made against the respondents 4 to 7 for destroying the boundary stone pillars to the land to an extent of Ac. 0.11 1/2 cents in Sy.No.100/B of Manukondavripalem Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18435 OF 2023 The Court made the following order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “….Pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 and 3 in taking the action on the complaints dt. 30-06-2023 and 10-07-2023 against the respondents 4 to 7 for destroying the boundary stone pillars to the land to an extent of Ac. 0.11 1/2 cents in Sy.No.100/8 of Manukondavripalem Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against to the principles of natural justice and to pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that, based on the contents in the complaints dated 30.06.2023 and 10.07.2023 made by the petitioner, it is found that the matter is civil in nature. He further submits that the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Recording the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of. The petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 04.12.2025 Ksj