Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49783 (AP)

Rebba Rajya Lakshmi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/11208/2019 · 2025-10-07

B V L N Chakravarthi

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010249922019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 11208/2019 Between: 1. REBBA RAJYA LAKSHMI, W/O VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 0CC. LOUSE WIFE, R/O CHITURPU, GHANTASLA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. MANTADA MERY LIZIA, W/O SALMAN RAJU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. POTHINA VARALAKSHMI, W/O MARUPILLA VENKATA RAMANA MURTHY AGED 55 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. GARNIPUDI ARUN PAL, W/O MOHANA RAO AGED 60 YEARS, OCC. BUSINES R/O NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA,D STRICT. 5. MATTA MERY PREMALATHA, W/O SALMON RAJU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. PILLI PADMAVATHI, W/O GANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 0CC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 7. MERUGA KALPANA,, W/O MOHAN RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYALWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2 8. JUJJAVARAPU MEENA SUNITHA, W/O ABRHAM AGED 55 YEARS, OCC.HOUSE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYA ADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 9. GUNTUR PREMA LEELA, W/O RATNAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAVADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 10. SURYANARAYANA, W/O POTHINA CHINTHAIA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 0CC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. NEW JOJI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, MANAGALAGIR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BHAVANI PURAM POLICE STATION, BHAVANI PURAM, VIJAYAWADA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. GIRI BABU MARTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.11208 OF 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring action of the 3rd respondent herein in interfering with the civil disputes in respect of the property to an extent of Ac.8.97 cents of dry land situated in New Joji Nagar Village, Bhvanipuram, Krishna District, covered by Sy.Nos. 17/5, 26/2, 34/1, 35/1, 36/1, 37/1, 38/1, 39/1, 24/4, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the not to interfere with the civil disputes in respect of the property to an extent of Ac.8.97 cents of dry land situated in New Joji Nagar Village, Bhvanipuram, Krishna District, covered by Sy.Nos. 17/5, 26/2, 34/1, 35/1, 36/1, 37/1, 38/1, 39/1, 24/4, and to pass…” 2. None appeared for the petitioners. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on written instructions would submit that no complaint was received from the petitioners as alleged in the writ petition. The dispute in the case is of civil in nature. The respondents never interfere in civil disputes and the allegations in the petitioners’ affidavits are not true and correct. The contention of the petitioners is that police are interfering in civil disputes. 4. The instructions received by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would disclose that the dispute between both parties is of civil in nature, and police will never interfere in the matter. 4 5. In that view of the matter, no further orders are required in the writ petition at this length of time. Hence, the writ petition can be closed at the stage of admission, without going into merits of the case. 6. 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 08.10.2025 Pmk 5 08 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No:11208 OF 2019 Date: 08.10.2025 Pmk