THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.7681 OF 2018

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…to issue a direction, order or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not providing the protection to the petitioners herein and to their property wherein the standing crops are existing (from 6^th respondent and his family members), in spite of petitioner’s repeated visits followed by Written Representations dated 29.11.2016, 30.12.2016 and 31.12.2016, as being illegal, unjust and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents police to act upon the above said complaints and take action in accordance with law, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case…”

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioners.

3. Heard Mr. D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and Mr. M.M.M. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that, as there was no specific direction either from the competent Court or from the higher authorities, the request for police protection made by the petitioners was not acted upon, the matter being purely civil in nature. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 submits that a decree was passed in favour of respondent No. 6 in O.S. No. 274 of 2014 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate & Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam, which was subsequently challenged by the petitioners through revision and review proceedings. However, all those proceedings were decided against the petitioners. Hence, the request of the petitioners for police protection in respect of their representations dated 29.11.2016, 30.12.2016, and 31.12.2016 pertaining to the subject property has become infructuous.

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

7. The contention of the petitioners is that the respondent police authorities failed to provide protection. However, the record discloses that respondent No. 6 had obtained a decree in O.S. No. 274 of 2014 on 11.11.2014 from the competent Court, which went in favour of respondent No. 6 and against the petitioners. It is further evident that the matter pertains to a civil dispute, and there is no material to show that any specific direction was issued by a competent Court requiring the police to provide protection to the petitioners.

8. In this view of the matter, the explanation offered by the respondent police authorities that in the absence of any such judicial direction, and considering that the dispute is civil in nature, they could not extend police protection appears to be reasonable and justified.

9. Accordingly, as nothing further survives for consideration, this Writ Petition is disposed of, while reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail such appropriate remedies as are available in law before the competent Court, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

___________________

N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17-11-2025 dpm THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.7681 OF 2018 Dated: 17.11.2025

dpm