1. Petitioners have filed this Writ Petition challenging the inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 6 in providing police aid for implementation of an injunction order granted in their favour on 24-09-2012 in C.M.A.No.66 of 2012 of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy at L.B. Nagar restraining respondent Nos.7 to 10 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioners in respect of their land admeasuring Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.19/AA situated at Hydershakote Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

PETITIONERS’ CONTENTIONS

2. Petitioners contend that they are the absolute owners of land admeasuring Ac.3.00 in the above village, which they inherited from the father of 4th petitioner. They contend that there was a family settlement among the family members consisting of their father and their uncles and pursuant thereto, the said land fell to the share of 4th petitioner’s father and his name was also mutated in the Revenue records. The 4th petitioner’s father died in 1985 and on his death, 4th petitioner and his brother A.Bharath Reddy, father of petitioner Nos.1 to 3 succeeded to the property. They contend that they developed part of land admeasuring Ac.1.10 guntas into a residential layout in 1990 and sold plots to various third parties. They contend that Ac.0.25 guntas of land belonging to them was taken away by the 1st respondent illegally for road widening without paying any compensation to them and they were left with Ac.1.05 guntas of land.

3. They alleged that when respondent Nos.7 to 10 were trying to interfere with their possession and enjoyment of the land, they filed O.S.No.1402 of 2010 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar for perpetual injunction. They also filed I.A.No.1406 of 2010 seeking temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. The said application was dismissed on 28-03-2012.

4. Challenging the same, they filed C.M.A.No.66 of 2012 before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. The said appeal was allowed on 24-09-2012. The Court noted that the evidence on record indicated that the petitioners’ names had been recorded in the Revenue records for more than 40 years from 1955-56 and proves the possession of petitioners over the subject land. It also held that the petitioners had prima facie right and title in the subject property and that respondent Nos.7 to 10 did not have any document of title and they did not file any document to prove their possession.

5. Respondent Nos.7 to 10 questioned the same in C.R.P.No.517 of 2013 before this Court. The said Revision was dismissed on 27-08-2016 confirming the findings of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar in C.M.A.No.66 of 2012.

6. The petitioners filed complaints/representations dt.26-05-2016 and 30-05-2016 to the respondent Nos.1 to 6 seeking police aid to protect their possession and for implementation of the order of temporary injunction granted by the Civil Court.

7. When this did not yield any results, they filed W.P.No.17048 of 2016 questioning the inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 6 in taking action against respondent Nos.7 to 10 on the basis of the complaint by them on 26-05-2016 and 30-05-2016 complaining about illegal interference, criminal trespass etc. into their land and in not providing police protection to enforce the injunction order granted in their favour and against respondent Nos.7 to 10 in C.M.A.No.66 of 2012.

8. At the admission stage, the said Writ Petition was disposed of on 02-06-2016 relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1 and holding that the allegations in the complaints referred to above given by petitioners prima facie disclose commission of cognizable offences and respondent Nos.1 to 6 should follow the said judgment of the Supreme Court and take appropriate steps. As far as the relief of police pro