APHC010226172026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11391/2026 Between: 1. GURRAPASALA GURAVAIAH, S/O. NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC DAILY LABOUR, R/O. D NO. 11-31 -490/72, BALAIAH NAGAR, 1ST LINE, NARASAREO PET, GUNTUR, AP-522601 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH-522237. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ,522237. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MARKAPURAM (PRAKASAM) DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-523316. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KANIGIRI POLICE STATION, KANIGIRI MANDAL, MARKAPURAM (PRAKASAM) DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 523230. 5. SMT NAGARATNAMMA, W/O. NARABOYINA KRISHNAIAH,AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.1-140, THUMMAGUNTA POST AND VILLAGE, KANIGIRI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRIT, AP- 523230. 6. SMT KALAVATHI, W/O. VELPULA CHINNA TIRUVATAYYA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS RIO. THUMMAGUNTA POST AND VILLAGE, 2 KANIGIRI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AP-523230. 7. SRI VENKATESWARLU, S/O. NARABOYINA VENKATAYYA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O. THUMMAGUNTA POST AND VILLAGE, KANIGIRI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AP-523230 8. SMT VENKATA RAMANA, W/O. BUDIGI MADHU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. THUMMAGUNTA POST AND VILLAGE, KANIGIRI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AP-523230. 9. SMT RATTAMMA, , W/O. INDIA CHENNAKESHAVULU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. THUMMAGUNTA POST AND VILLAGE, KANIGIRI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AP-523230. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GAJJALA MALLIKARJUNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the Respondents No. 5 to 9 and restraining the petitioner to enter into their own land existed in Sy.No. 80/2 to an extent of Ac.1.39 cents situated in Thummagunta Village, Kanigiri Mandal, Prakasam District, is illegal, arbitrary and without following the procedure established by law and in voilation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-Aof the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the 4th Respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute pending between the Petitioner and Respondents 5 to 9 in respect of the subject property, except in accordance with due process of law, and not to obstruct the Petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment till appropriate adjudication by a competent Civil Court, and to pass…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3 3. Mr. Gajjala Mallikarjuna Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Respondent Police have been interfering in the civil disputes pending between the Petitioners and Respondent Nos.5 to 9 in respect of land measuring Ac.1.39 cents in Sy.No.80/2, situated at Thummagunta village, Kanigiri Mandal. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that Respondent No.8 lodged a complaint before Respondent No.4 on 11.04.2026, pursuant to which the Petitioner was called to the Police Station for a preliminary enquiry. During the enquiry, it was found that the dispute between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 to 9 is civil in nature. The Respondent Police merely advised the parties to approach the appropriate civil forum for redressal of their grievances. It is further submitted that Respondent No.4 never interfered with the Petitioner’s possession or restrained him from entering upon the subject property, and the Petitioner was not thereafter called to the police station. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Respondent No.4 not to interfere henceforth in the civil dispute between the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos.5 to 9 without following due process of law. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 08.05.2026 PRA 5 298 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11391 of 2026 Date: 08.05.2026 PRA