APHC010521132024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 27160/2024 Between: 1. THADI VELUGONDA REDDY,, S/O PEDDIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, RJO D.NO 2-54, RAGASAMUDRAM VILLAGE KALUJUVVALAPADU, TARLUPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AT ONGOLE, AP 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, PODILI CIRCLE, PODILI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, TARLUPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, TARLUPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, KALUJUVVALAPADU VILLAGE, TARLUPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no 4 in interfering with petitioners personal life and liberty, threatening him with dire consequences if I fail to settle the civil disputes with his adjacent land owners, harassing him to remove the thatched house erected in his schedule property i.e., Ac. 0.25 cents in RS No 148-2 situated in Ragasamudram Village, Tarlupadu Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh is highly illegal, arbitrary exercise of power, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners life and liberty and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioner’s life and liberty pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TURAGA SAI SURYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 27160 of 2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no 4 in interfering with petitioners personal life and liberty, threatening him with dire consequences if I fail to settle the civil disputes with his adjacent land owners, harassing him to remove the thatched house erected in his schedule property i.e., Ac. 0.25 cents in RS No 148-2 situated in Ragasamudram Village, Tarlupadu Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh is highly illegal, arbitrary exercise of power, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners life and liberty and pass.…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the police are interfering with the civil disputes in between the petitioner and third parties. Learned counsel would further submit that a direction may be given to the police. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions would submit that one P. Venkateswara Reddy lodged a complaint against one Thadi Kasi Reddy who is brother of the petitioner. Later, the parties including the petitioner were called to the police station for preliminary enquiry. After due enquiry, the parties were advised to work out their remedy before the competent civil Court. He would further submit that police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 6. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 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: 30.12.2025. TVN HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.27160 of 2024 Dated.30.12.2025 TVN 285