APHC010008222021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 588 OF 2021 Between: 1. NEIGAPULA JANARDHAN RAO (ADVOCATE), S/o Late Sanyasi Naidu, aged 63 years, R/o Nerellavalasa Colony, Bhimunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, Bhimunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District 2. The Commissioner of Police, Visakhaptanam. 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department Amaravati. 4. PreLitigation Counselling Forum, Represented by its Secretary/ Member Room No 12, Swarna Bharathi Indoor Stadium Visakhapatnam 5. Kanugula Prabhakar Rao, S / o Late Ranganayakulu Retired Lecturer R/o 13-32-61, Nehru Street, Bhimunipatnam Visakhapatnam District ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: K A NARASIMHAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents:G TUHIN KUMAR The Court made the following order: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 588 of 2021 ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a Writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 & 2 in referring the civil dispute between me and the 5th respondent as reported by him to the police for settlement of land disputes and the 4th respondent issuing a summon to me without having any legal entitlement or authority directing me to appear before it for settlement of land disputes as illegal, arbitrary without any competence or jurisdiction or legal authority and to consequently direct the respondents not to summon me for settlement of any land or any civil dispute and to withdraw the notice of the 4th respondent dated 20.11.2020 in PLCF No 102/2020”. 2. Heard Sri K.A.Narasimham, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the 4th respondent summoned the petitioner to appear before settlement of land disputes to settle the civil dispute between the parties which is not in accordance with law. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents brought to the notice of the Court that basing on the complaint of the 5th respondent, the 4th respondent called the petitioner for counselling to settle the dispute between the parties. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that, it is the choice of the petitioner to attend or not to attend the PLCF and he further submits that there is no threat on the petitioner to appear before PLCF to settle the dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent. 5. In that view, the writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner and the 5th respondent shall workout their remedies before appropriate forum according to 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: 08.10.2025 Dvs THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 154 WRIT PETITION NO: 588 of 2021 Date: 08.10.2025 Dvs