IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.6783 OF 2019 DATE: 08.01.2026 Between:

Shaik Feroz. …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana & Others …Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly on a the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners property situated at Plot No.96 (Part), in Sy.No.3, Sogbowli Village, Rajendranagar, R.R. District without registering any complaint and trying forcefully evict the Petitioner as arbitrary and illegal and violation of Article 19, 21, 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent no.3 and 4 to not to interfere into the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners property situated at Plot No.96 (Part), in Sy.No.3, Sogbowli Village, Rajendranagar, R.R. District and pass.......”

2. Heard Ms.Satya Kameshwari, learned counsel representing Mr.Deepak Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have been interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property described in the writ petition. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s lawful possession and enjoyment of the said property. He further submits that this Court, having considered the submissions made, passed an interim order on 15.04.2019 directing the respondent police not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of Plot No.96 (Part) in Survey No.3, Sogbowli Village, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. It is contended that this interim direction has effectively redressed the grievance of the petitioner, and therefore, a prayer is made to make the said interim order absolute.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the allegation that the police authorities have interfered with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property is unfounded and baseless. He further submits that the respondent police authorities have been acting strictly in accordance with law and within the scope of their authority. The learned Government Pleader also submits that the interim direction passed by this Court has been duly implemented and continues to be complied with. Hence, he prays that the petition be disposed of with appropriate directions.

5. I have perused the material available on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent police authorities have interfered with his lawful possession over the subject property, despite the matter being purely of a civil nature. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court observes that the role of the police in civil disputes is limited. The law is well settled that police authorities are not to interfere in matters relating to civil rights, possession, or ownership unless there is an element of criminality or threat to public order.

7. In the present case, the petitioner’s grievance was addressed through an interim order dated 15.04.2019, wherein this Court directed the respondent police not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the subject property. The said interim order admittedly had effectively safeguarded the petitioner’s rights and has been duly complied with by the respondent authorities. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, making the interim order absolute would adequately protect the petitioner’s interests and maintain the status quo until any adjudication by a competent civil court, if required.

8. Accordingly, the interim direction dated 15.04.2019 is made absolute. With this observation and direction, th