APHC010610072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31763/2025 Between: 1. SARAMPATI SATYA PRASAD, S/O KURMACHARYULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O APPANAVEEDU VILLAGE, PEDAPADU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PEDAPADU POLICE STATION, PEDAPADU, ELURU DISTRICT 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEDAPADU POLICE STATION, PEDAPADU, ELURU DISTRICT. 6. ALAPATI SURESH, S/O LATE DISEEKHARA RAO, AGED 52 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 3-87, APPANAVEEDU VILLAGE, PEDAPADU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. GANTA SIVA, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO R/O APPANAVEEDU VILLAGE, PEDAPADU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring that the Respondent 4 and 5 cannot interfere in any civil disputes between the citizens and cannot take on themselves the function of a civil court at the instance of unofficial Respondents 6 and 7 and threatening the petitioner to settle the property disputes pending with the 6th Respondent being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of Principles of Natural Justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed, by the Petitioner for the following relief: “ ... to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring that the Respondents 4 and 5 cannot interfere in any civil disputes between the citizens and cannot take on themselves the function of a civil court at the instance of unofficial Respondents 6 and 7 and threatening the petitioner to settle the property disputes pending with the 6th Respondent being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of Principles of Natural Justice and pass ...” Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing for respondent State. Perused the material on record. Learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record, the written instructions and would submit that basing on the PGRS application of the Petitioner, respondent Police called the Petitioner to the Police Station and informed him that the subject matter is purely civil in nature and during investigation, the Investigating Officer found that the complaint is „civil in nature‟ and requested to dispose of the Writ Petition by passing appropriate orders. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that recording the said submission, this Writ Petition may be disposed of. In that view, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* Dinesh