APHC010698672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 35769/2025 Between: 1. BUDDULA DURGAMMA ALIAS CHODEM DURGAMMA, W/O. LATE GANGARAJU, AGED 70 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O TURUPU REGULA KUNTA VILLAGE, BUTTAYAGUDEM MANDAL, (PRESENTLY ELURU DISTRICT) WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BUTTAYAGUDEM POLICE STATION, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. BUDDULA RAMADEVI, DAUGHTER OF (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED 32 YEARS, R/O TURUPU REGULA KUNTA VILLAGE BUTTAYAGUDEM MANDAL, (PRESENTLY ELURU DISTRICT) WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. BUDDULA SANDHYA, DAUGHTER OF (LATE) GANGARAJU, AGED 30 YEARS, R/O TURUPU REGULA KUNTA VILLAGE, BUTTAYAGUDEM MANDAL, (PRESENTLY ELURU DISTRICT) WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 2 1. SUBBARAO DHULIPALLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 35769/2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents, especially the 3rd respondent, in not taking action on the petitioner’s complaint as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India. Consequently direct the respondent police authorities to take appropriate action on the petitioner’s complaint in accordance with law, direct the respondents not to involve, interfere with, or permit any third-party interference with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property, which stood finally settled and granted in favour of the petitioners predecessor and confirmed by 1979 grant police protection to the petitioner’s person and property.…” 2. Heard Sri D.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the official respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police are not taking any action on the complaint made by the petitioner. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the respondent-police have not received any complaint/report from the petitioner. He would further submit that the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. 4 5. Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out her remedies before the appropriate forum according to law. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 29.12.2025. UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 35769/2025 Dated.29.12.2025 UPS 140