APHC010696432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 36394/2025 Between: 1. SURLA SATISH KUMAR @ SANNI BABU, S/O RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O.H.NO.3-81, NEAR MARKET. SABBAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL. ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522238 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SABBAVARAM PS, SABAVARAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 531035 3. THE TASLIDHAR, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, SABAVARAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 531035 4. DARAPU VENKATA RAMANA ALIAS KARALA RAMANA, , S/O ERUKULU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,R/O VANGALI VILLAGE, TEKALIPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. - 531035 5. VADISALA NUKARAJU, , S/O APPALSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O TELUGULAPALEM, VANGALI VILLAGE, BANGARAMMAPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. - 531035 6. VADISALA ESWARA RAO, S/O TATALU AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O.TELUGULAPALEM, VANGALI VILLAGE, BANGARAMMAPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. 531035 7. VADISALA BANGARAIAH, S/O DEMUDU, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O.TELUGULAPALEM, VANGALI VILLAGE, BANGARAMMAPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. 531035 8. VADISALA DURGA RAO, S/O RAMU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O.TELUGULAPALEM, VANGALI VILLAGE, BANGARAMMAPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. 531035 2 9. VADISALA CHIRANJEEVI, S/O YERRI NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O.TELUGULAPALEM, VANGALI VILLAGE, BANGARAMMAPALEM POST, SABBAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM) DISTRICT. 531035 ...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 Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in not taking action against the unofficial respondents and their followers who are cutting 6 Mango Trees and 3 Cashew Nut Trees illegally, forcibly, unauthorized and transporting the wood in Tractor and Trolley bearing No.AP31DB4343 in SY.No.213, 214 situated at Vangali Village, Sabavaram Mandal, Anakapalli District belongs to the petitioner for seizure of the Mango Wood and Cashew Nut Wood along with the Tractor and trolley bearing No.AP31DB4343 belongs to the 4th respondent who also involved in crime in-spite of making complaints dated 17.10.2025 and 13.12.2025 is highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent nos.2 and 3 to take appropriate action against unofficial respondents for recovery of the stolen Mango Wood and Cashew Nut Wood and duly punishing as per Law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J M NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 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 Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not taking action against the unofficial respondents and their followers who are cutting 6 Mango Trees and 3 Cashew Nut Trees illegally, forcibly, unauthorized and transporting the wood in Tractor and Trolley bearing No.AP31DB4343 in SY.No.213, 214 situated at Vangali Village, Sabavaram Mandal, Anakapalli District belongs to the petitioner for seizure of the Mango Wood and Cashew Nut Wood along with the Tractor and trolley bearing No.AP31DB4343 belongs to respondent No.4, who also involved in crime in-spite of making complaints dated 17.10.2025 and 13.12.2025 is highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate action against unofficial respondents for recovery of the stolen Mango Wood and Cashew Nut Wood and duly punishing as per Law and pass ...= Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing for respondent State. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that there are ownership disputes between the Petitioner and unofficial respondents with regard to the subject land. In this regard, respondent No.2 requested respondent No.3 to conduct survey by the Surveyor and to fix boundaries as per the land records. Further, Mandal Surveyor visited the subject land and asked the parties to submit the relevant documents with regard to the subject property. Petitioner submitted the relevant documents to the Surveyor, whereas, unofficial respondents could not produce any document with regard to the subject land. Further, the unofficial respondents illegally tried to remove the Mango and 4 cashew nut wood and both for which the petitioner and his family members obstructed the same. Keeping grudge, unofficial respondents high handedly damaged the front glass of the Petitioner’s car and threatened him and his family members with deadly weapons like axes, knives, sticks with a fear of death. Learned counsel would submit that Petitioner lodged written complaints on 17.10.2025 and 13.12.2025, till date, but the Police did not date any action on the said complaints. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions would submit that respondent Police wrote a letter to the Tahsidar with regard to the genuineness certificate indicate the rightful owner of the subject property as per the revenue records. The reply from respondent No.3 is awaited. Further, the dispute is purely civil in nature, respondent Police have issued a letter dated 13.12.2025 stating that after verifying the records and genuineness about the facts of the case, action will be taken on his complaint. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that this Writ Petition may be disposed of by passing appropriate orders. Considering the submissions made, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Petitioner is at liberty to pursue his case with the respondent Police. Respondent Police are directed to communicate the petitioner about the progress of the investigation as per the procedure contemplated under law. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 06.01.2026 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 36394 of 2025 06.01.2026 Mjl /*