ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in non-considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 26.06.2023 and non-initiating to register FIR against the respondents No.6 and 7 who are attacking on the Disabled Petitioner by trespassing into the land of the Petitioner Ac.1-00 Gts, in Survey No.176/119 (old Survey No.176) which is situated at Rudrangi Village and Mandal Rajanna Siricilla District during the Injunction Order in I.A.No.11 of 2024 in O.S.No.10 of 2024 on the file of Hon’ble Junior Civil Judge Court at Vemulawada and not restraining the illegal activities of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 26.06.2023 and to register FIR against the respondents No 6 and 7 who are attacking on the Disabled Petitioner by trespassing into the land of the Petitioner Ac.1-00 Gts in Survey No.176/119 (old Survey No.176) which is situated at Rudrangi Village and Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District during the Injunction Order in I.A.No.11 of 2024 in O.S.No.10 of 2024 on the file of Hon’ble Junior Civil Judge Court at Vemulawada and pass…”

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.1-00 Gts in Survey No.176/119 (old Survey No.176), situated at Rudrangi Village and Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. The case of the petitioner is that he is a landless poor person with 90% disability and taking advantage of the same, respondents No.6 and 7 are making efforts to dispossess him and trying to grab the subject land. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner instituted a suit in O.S. No.10 of 2024 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Vemulawada (for short ‘trial Court’) seeking injunction restraining the respondents No.6 and 7 from interfering with his peaceful possession over the subject land and ad-interim temporary injunction order dated 29.01.2024 in I.A. No.11 of 2024 in O.S. No.10 of 2024 was granted in favour of the petitioner.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after granting of the injunction order dated 29.01.2024, respondents No.6 and 7 are trying to trespass into the subject land of the petitioner and making efforts to forcibly dispossess him from the subject land. It is stated that stating the said facts, the petitioner filed representation dated 07.06.2024 with respondents No.3 to 5. Though the said complaint revealed cognizable offence, respondents No.3 to 5 have not registered any case in accordance with the law laid down in by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalitha Kumari v. Government of U.P and have not initiated any action, as such, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition.

AIR 2012 SC 1515

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has stated that the petitioner instituted suit in O.S. No.10 of 2024 before the trial Court with the same set of allegations as stated by him in the complaint dated 07.06.2024 and in the said suit, injunction order dated 29.01.2024 in I.A. No.11 of 2024 was granted in his favour against respondents No.6 and 7. It is further stated that if respondents No.6 and 7 have violated and disobeyed the injunction order in any manner, the petitioner always has a right to file a application under Order XXXIX Rule 2(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) before the competent civil Court or file an application seeking Police aid. The petitioner, instead of availing such remedies, filed the said complaint. As such, the complaint of the petitioner dated 07.06.2024 was closed as civil in nature.

5. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition granting li