APHC010166812024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] SATURDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 8317/2024 Between: 1. MULLA MABU SHARIEF, S/O. MULLA PEERAM SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDENT OF H. NO. 1-22, MULLA STREET, PEDDAVANGALI VILLAGE, CHAGALAMARRI MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAI, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALLAGADDA RURAL, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALLAGADDA RURAL, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 5. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAGALAMARRI TOWN, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 6. M MABASHA, S/O. M. SHARIEF @ BADESA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OPPOSITE DARGAH, PEDDAVANGALI VIILAGE, CHAGALAMARRI MANDAI, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 7. M GOUSE, S/O. M. DASTHAGIRI @ NEIATURU DASTHAGIRI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OPPOSITE DARGAH, PEDDAVANGALI VILIAGE, CHAGALAMARRI MANDAI, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 8. M SHARIEF BADESA, S/O. M. DASTHAGIRI @ NELATURU DASTHAGIRI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OPPOSITE DARGAH, PEDDAVANGAII VIIIAGE, CHAGALAMARRI MANDAI, NANDYAI DISTRICT. 9. M GAFFAR, S/O. M. SHARIEF @ BADESA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OPPOSITE DARGAH, PEDDAVANGAII VILLAGE, CHAGALAMARRI MANDAI, NANDYAI DI ...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 direction, or an order or a writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in not registereing the F.I.R on the complaint dated 26.03.2024 of the petitioner against the respondent Nos. 6 to 9 and not providing the police protection at Hazarath Mahaboob Subhani Dasthagiri Swamy Daragh is illegal, arbitarary and unconstitutional and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 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 direction, or an order or a writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not registering the F.I.R on the complaint dated 26.03.2024 of the petitioner against the respondent Nos. 6 to 9 and not providing the police protection at Hazarath Mahaboob Subhani Dasthagiri Swamy Daragh is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to 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 on instructions would submit that there is a dispute between the Petitioner and the unofficial respondents with regard to performing Mujavar duties in the Darga. As per the agreement, Petitioner has to perform Mujavar duty for the year 2025. The allegations of the complaint are that the unofficial respondents are interfering with the duties of the Petitioner, which is purely civil in nature. Hence, Police did not register any crime and requested to dispose of the Writ Petition by passing appropriate orders. In that view, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Petitioner is at liberty to work out the remedy before appropriate forum according to law. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 8317 of 2024 22.11.2025 Mjl /* Dinesh