IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.33942 OF 2018 DATE : 06.01.2026 Between:

Mirla Sayeed Ali Baig …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and Others …Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 3 and 4 in providing police protection to the petitioner herein in spite of the representations of petitioner, dated 03.09.2018 and 07.09.2018 for implementing the injunction granted in O.S.No.84 of 2008 by the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, dated 11.11.2008, in respect of the land admeasuring 651.66 square yards in Survey No.1368 situated at Subhashnagar locality of Karimnagar, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 to give police protection to implement the injunction granted in O.S.No.84 of 2008 by the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, dated 11.11.2008, in respect of the land admeasuring 651.66 square yards in Survey No.1368 situated at Subhashnagar locality of Karimnagar, and pass........”

2. Heard Mr.Mirza Azmath Ali Baig, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the unofficial respondents are interfering with the petitioner’s possession of the subject property. He contends that, in light of the decree of permanent injunction passed in O.S. No. 84 of 2008 by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking police protection. However, as respondent Nos. 3 and 4 failed to act upon the said representation and remained indifferent, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by way of the present Writ Petition seeking appropriate directions for enforcement of the civil court decree. He further submits that, during the pendency of this petition in the year 2024, the petitioner filed an Execution Petition (E.P.) before the learned Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, which is presently pending consideration.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on the other hand, submits that there was no specific order from the competent court directing the police authorities to extend protection to the petitioner. In the absence of such direction, respondents/police authorities could not have unilaterally provided police aid. It is further submitted that, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged non- implementation of the civil court decree, he is bound to pursue appropriate remedies before the Executing Court under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), or any other remedy available under law. Accordingly, the learned Pleader prays for dismissal of the Writ Petition.

5. I have carefully perused the material available on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that his representation seeking police aid for enforcing the decree of permanent injunction granted in O.S. No. 84 of 2008 has not been considered by the respondent authorities. However, from the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is evident that, as on the date of filing the present Writ Petition, no Execution Petition had been filed before the competent civil court seeking enforcement of the said decree or seeking police protection for its implementation. The petitioner has subsequently filed an Execution Petition during the pendency of this Writ Petition.

7. It is a well-settled principle of law that the proper course for enforcing a civil court decree is to invoke the execution mechanism provided under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which empower the Executing Court to ensure compliance with its decrees, including through police aid where necessary. The High Court, while exercising its w