APHC010701392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 36022/2025 Between: 1. B. JAYALAKSHMAMMA, W/O BOYA NARASIMHULU. AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, PEDDAKODIPAHI VILLAGE, RODDAM MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.522238 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT,515134 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUTTAPARTI, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT,515134 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. 515110 5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PENUKONDA REVENUE DIVISION, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, 6. THE TAHSILDAR, RODDAM MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, 515123 7. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, 515110 8. THE SUBINSPECTOR, RODDAM POLICE STATION, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, 9. BANDI VENKATESHU, S/O LATE BANDI NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. AGRICULTURIST, PEDDAKODIPALLI VILLAGE, RODDAM MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, PIN CODE 515123. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: 2 “.... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents particularly against the respondents 7 and 8 in interfering in the civil dispute and directing the petitioner not to enter in to the land admeasuring Ac.3.48 cents out of Ac. 10.28 cents in Sy.No.273 of Roddam Revenue Village and Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and threatening her to dispossess from the subject iand as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, unconstitutionaland in violationof Article 14,21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 7 and 8 not to interfere in the civil dispute and dispossess the petitioner from the subject land” 2. Heard Sri Seelam Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the police received a representation from the petitioner through the Public Grievance Redressal System. For the purpose of enquiry, the police called both the parties. Upon enquiry, it was found that the subject matter is civil in nature, and accordingly, the police advised both the parties to pursue their remedies before the appropriate forum. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that the police never interfered in the civil dispute between the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of by recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between 3 the parties except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.01.2026 Asr 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.36022 of 2025 Dt.05.01.2026 Asr