APHC010069412023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 3430/2023 Between: 1. SMT. R.RAMANAMMA,, D/O MEKALA GANGANNA, W/O S.JAYARAMULU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC- CULTIVATION, R/O 2-64, TEMPERA VILLAGE,NARPALA MANDAL, ANANTPUR DISTRICT. 2. SMT. VASANTHA,, D/O M.GANGANNA, W/O T.VENKATRAMUDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC-CULTIVATION,R/O D.NO.2- 70-1 S.C. COLONY, ARAKATIVEMULA (V) MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. SMT. RAKULA SUNITHA,, D/O M.GANGANNA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC-CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO.4-469, MARUTHINAGAR, BATHALAPALLI VILLAGE AND MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUTTAPURTHI SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PUTTAPARTHI MANDAL, SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT. 2 4. SMT M RAMA LAKSHMI, W/O LATE SRINIVASULU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/O D.NO.1-1738, R.S.ROAD, MUDIGUBBA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI 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 any writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring action of the respondent 2 and 3 not taking any action against the 4th respondent on representation/Complaint dated,2-2- 2023 made by the petitioners granting of police aid to the petitioners from the high handed interference by the 4th respondent herein irrespective of Injunction order granted by the Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri in I.A.No.517/2022 in O.S.No.447/2022, on dated,11-07-2022 is as illegal, arbitrary and against law and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to provide Police aid to the petitioner to enter the suit schedule land survey No.429-4B an extent of Ac.1- 01 full and Sy No.827-B an extent of Ac.1-45 cents situated at Gunji Palli Village , Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District and also be pleased to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 please to direct the respondent No.3 to provide Police aid to the petitioner to enter the suit schedule land survey No.429-4B an extent of Ac.1-01 full and Sy No.827-B an extent of Ac.1-45 cents situated at Gunji Palli Village , Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District by considering representation of the petitioner dated,2-2-2023 pending disposal of the writ petition and also be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. INENI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 3430 of 2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…to issue any writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring action of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 not taking any action against the 4th respondent on representation/Complaint dated 02-02-2023 made by the petitioners granting of police aid to the petitioners from the high handed interference by the 4th respondent herein irrespective of Injunction order granted by the Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri in I.A.No.517/2022 in O.S.No.447/2022, on dated,11-07- 2022 is as illegal, arbitrary and against law and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to provide Police aid to the petitioner to enter the suit schedule land survey No.429-4B an extent of Ac.1-01 full and Sy No.827-B an extent of Ac.1-45 cents situated at Gunji Palli Village , Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District and also be pleased to pass.…” 2. None represented on behalf of the petitioners. 3. The present petition was filed questioning the action of the respondent police in not considering the representation of the petitioners for grant of police aid to the petitioners from the interference of 4th respondent in the subject property irrespective of Injunction Order granted by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri in I.A.No.517/2022 in O.S.No.447/2022, dated 11-07-2022. 4. Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that since it is a civil matter unless there is any direction from the Court, they cannot provide police aid to the petitioners. 4 5. As can be seen from the record, the interim injunction granted by the Civil Court is an ad-interim injunction which is not passed on merits after hearing both sides. 6. It is beneficial to refer the Judgment of the Hon’ble the Apex Court in P.R.Mualidharan and others v. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar and others1 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court declared the law on this subject in the following manner: "A writ petition under the guise of seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police authorities to give protection to a writ petitioner, cannot be made a forum for adjudicating on civil rights. It is one thing to approach the High Court, for issuance of such a writ on a plea that a particular party has not obeyed a decree or an order of injunction passed in favour of the writ petitioner, was deliberately flouting that decree or order and in spite of the petitioner applying for it, or that the police authorities are not giving him the needed protection in terms of the decree or order passed by a Court with jurisdiction. But, it is quite another thing to seek a writ of mandamus directing protection in respect of property, status or right which remains to be adjudicated upon and when such an adjudication can only be got done in a properly instituted civil suit. It would be an abuse of process for a writ petitioner to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police authorities to protect his claimed possession of a property without first establishing his possession in an appropriate civil Court." (Emphasis supplied) 7. Considering the submissions and in the light of the above principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, since the interim injunction passed by the 1 2006 (4) SCC 501 5 Court is not passed on merits after hearing both parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioners are at liberty to work out their remedies before the competent Court where the suit is pending. 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: 04.12.2025. UPS 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.3430 of 2023 Dated.04.12.2025 UPS 201