Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51736 (AP)

Palagiri Mallikarjuna Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/19909/2021 · 2025-10-06

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010330352021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 19909/2021 Between: 1. PALAGIRI MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, S/O.PALAGIRI OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O.LEBAKA, NANDALUR MANDAL,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , SRI CITY HI-TECH POLICE STATION, SRI CITY, VARADAIAHPALEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, SRI CITY HI-TECH POLICE STATION, SRI CITY, VARADAIAHPALEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. OBULAPURAM PARAMASIVA REDDY, S/O. MANIKYA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. PUDI VILLAGE, KARUR POST, TUDA MANDAL,SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 6. OBULAPURAM CHANDRAMMA, , W/O. LATE SHANMUGA REDDY, RESIDENT OF PUDI VILLAGE, KARURU POST, TADA MANDALAM, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondents No.2 to 4 in not providing police aid to the Petitioner restraining the Respondent No. 5 and 6 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.No.33/2 to an extent of Ac.9-73 cents of Thonduru Village of Varadaiah Palem, Chittoor District and not considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 21.06.2021 as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RAMAMOHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S DHEERA KANISHKA 2. GP FOR HOME 3. P GANGA RAMI REDDY 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “....to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the Respondents No.2 to 4 in not providing police aid to the Petitioner restraining the Respondent No. 5 and 6 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.No.33/2 to an extent of Ac.9-73 cents of Thonduru Village of Varadaiah Palem, Chittoor District and not considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 21.06.2021 as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law and pass ...” Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent/State. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that despite Petitioner made a representation to the Police seeking police protection to protect his property, respondent Police did not respondent on his representation. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 would submit that multiple representations have been filed by the Petitioner as well as respondent No.5 and that respondent No.5 also filed a suit with regard to the subject matter which is pending before the competent Civil Court. Learned counsel prays for dismissal of the Writ petition. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit this Writ Petition may be disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to work out the remedy before competent Civil Court where the suit is pending. 3 Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on written instructions would submit that Petitioner and unofficial respondents are having land disputes which are purely civil in nature and that the Court may pass appropriate orders. In that view, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Petitioner is at liberty to work out the remedy before the competent Civil Court according to law. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 19909 2021 07.10.2025 Mjl /*