ORDER:

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

“…to issue writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the officials respondent No.2 in not providing police protection to the petitioners in respect of land Sy.No.363/1 (Sy.No.363/37/1A/2) extent Ac,5-00 Gts., of Naganool village and land in Sy.No.363/1 (Sy.No.363/37/1/AA) extent Ac.5-00 Gts., of Naganool Village, Nagarkumool Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to provide police protection to the petitioners to safeguard possession of the petitioners in respect of land Sy.No.363/1 (Sy.No.363/37/1A/2) extent Ac,5-00 Gts., of Naganool village and land in Sy.No.363/1 (Sy.No.363/37/1/AA) extent Ac.5-00 Gts., of Naganool Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District and also suffer irreparable loss of their livelihood....”

2. None appeared for the petitioners.

3. Heard Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

4.1. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the petitioners have approached this Court seeking police protection for enforcement of an ad-interim injunction order granted by the competent Civil Court. It is contended that, in the absence of any specific direction issued by the Civil Court to the police authorities for providing protection or assistance in implementing the said injunction order, no action could be initiated by the police. The petitioners were, therefore, advised to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.

4.2. It is further submitted that the legal position is well settled that for the implementation or enforcement of an order or dealing with disobedience or breach of an injunction order or decree passed by a Civil Court the appropriate remedy lies within the framework of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), and not by way of a writ petition, thus, pleaded that the present writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

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

6. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No. 2 has failed to provide police protection in respect of the petition schedule property, despite the existence of an ad-interim injunction granted in I.A. No. 258 of 2013 in O.S. No. 122 of 2013 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool. The essence of the petitioners’ claim is the enforcement of the said injunction order against the unofficial respondents, who are defendants in the pending civil suit.

7. The issue as to whether a writ petition is maintainable for seeking police protection to enforce a civil court’s injunction order is no longer res integra. A Division Bench of this Court in Kabbakula Padma v. State of Telangana, (2023) 1 ALT 765, has categorically held that where there is a violation of an injunction order, the aggrieved party must approach the Civil Court and invoke remedies under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A CPC. The Court emphasized that the machinery under the CPC is both adequate and efficacious for enforcement of such orders, including seeking consequential directions such as police aid, where warranted.

8. A perusal of the record in the present case clearly indicates that the petitioners have not availed themselves of the remedies available before the Civil Court seeking enforcement of the injunction or for police assistance. In the absence of such recourse, and in the absence of any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances warranting interference under Article 226, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

9. Accordingly, this writ petition, seeking implementation of the injunction order through police protection, is held to be not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedies available under law before the Civil Court, includi