Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41899 (AP)

Chakka Chiranjeevi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/27495/2022 · 2025-11-16

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010429252022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 27495/2022 Between: CHAKKA CHIRANJEEVI, S/O. SESHAGIRI RAO, AGED 47 YEARS, R/O. ELEPHANT TREE, ONGOLE TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, I TOWN POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. MR T VENKATESWARLU, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, OCC. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, I TOWN POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. PERLA PRAKASA RAO, S/O. LATE SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 104/54, GOMATHA NAGAR, 4TH STREET, NEAR KIL PARK, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU. 6. PERLA VENKATA SWAMY, S/O. LATE SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/O. H.NO. 1-1-31/73, 1 SAKET COLONY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. 7. PERLA VENAKTA SUBBA RAO, S/O. LATE SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 1-10, AYYANGARI 5TH STREET, ADYAR, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU STATE. 8. PERLA ANASUYA, W/O. LATE RAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 25/1, NEAR VIVEKANANDA STATUE, KUKATPALLI, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. 9. PERLA BADARI NARAYANA, S/O, LATE S4ANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 7-2554, VITERI STREET, KONDITHOPU, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU STATE. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A VARALAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 herein in official capacity in interfering with the property of the petitioner in schedule Item No. 1 to 9 covered under the schedule before the I Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District in I.A. No. 499 of 2022 in O.S. No. 42 of 2022 under due influence of respondents 5 to 9 herein who are the defendants in the suit in O.S. No. 42 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District in-spite of the interim direction by the court of common law in obstructing to interfere with the property of the petitioner as stated above pending suit dated 24.06.2022 as illegal, arbitrary and also oppose to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India as well as Article 14, 21 and also oppose to all cannons of justice consequentially direct the respondents 3 and 4 herein not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioner which is the subject matter in I.A. No. 499 of 2022 in O.S. No. 42 of 2022 i.e., the property in schedule Item No. 1 to 9 covered under the schedule before the I Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District pending between the petitioner and the respondents 5 to 9 herein without there being any case or cause.” 2. Ms.A.Varalakshmi, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, with the influence of the unofficial Respondents, the Police are interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the Petitioner. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, in view of the interim order dated 30.08.2022 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the Police never interfered with the civil dispute between the Petitioner and the unofficial Respondents. 3 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and the unofficial Respondents, except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:17.11.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.27495 of 2022 Dt.17.11.2025 Dinesh