IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI DATE: 27.01.2026 Between :

Ch. Venkateswara Rao … Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and four others.

… Respondents.

O R D E R:

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

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No. 3 herein in not taking any action against the unofficial respondent Nos. 4 and 5 for trespassing and trying to make illegal and unauthorized constructions made in the land in Sy.No. 29, situated at Guttala Begumpet Village, Sherilingampally Mandal, R.R. District, during the subsistence of the status-quo orders in I.A.No. 1066/2014 in O.S.No. 619/2014 on the file of the VIII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, R.R. District at L.B.Nagar in spite of the written complaint dt. 11-5-2019 as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to take immediate action against the respondent Nos.

4 and 5 pursuant to the complaint dt. 11-5-2019, and to grant such other relief or reliefs…”

2. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Mekala, learned counsel, representing Mr. N. Hari Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Ms. B. Sreelatha, learned counsel, representing Mr. Subramanyam Daraboina, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the existence of an order of status quo passed in I.A. No. 1066 of 2014 in O.S. No. 619 of 2014 on the file of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, the respondent police authorities, particularly respondent No. 3, failed to take any action against the unofficial respondents. It is further submitted that, notwithstanding the written representation made by the petitioner bringing the alleged violation of the said interim order to the notice of the police, no action was initiated, thereby necessitating the filing of the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the police concerned did receive the representation submitted by the petitioner. However, upon considering the contents thereof and noting that the dispute essentially pertains to a civil matter, the petitioner was advised to approach the competent Civil Court for redressal. In such circumstances, no police action was taken. It is therefore, contended that the allegation that the police failed to act on the petitioner’s representation is unfounded, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submits that if the petitioner seeks implementation or enforcement of an interim order passed by a Civil Court, the appropriate and efficacious remedy lies before the Executing Court under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), and not by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that this legal position has been consistently affirmed by various coordinate Benches of this Court. Consequently, the allegations levelled against respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who are unofficial respondents, are without any legal basis, and the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves dismissal.

6. I have perused the material available on record.

7. The substance of the petitioner’s grievance is that the respondent police authorities failed to act upon his representation seeking implementation of the interim order of status quo passed in O.S. No. 619 of 2014. A careful reading of the pleadings clearly indicates that the petitioner has not approached the Civil Court concerned