1. Petitioners sought a hearing before police act on respondent's representation regarding property execution orders. (Para 1 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 38637
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Tangirala Madhavi Devi, J
Velpuri Venkata Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.33539 OF 2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Srinivas Reddy
For the Respondents: D. Pradeep
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Srinivas Reddy
For the Respondents: D. Pradeep
The Court directed the police to afford the petitioners an opportunity to be heard and consider their contentions before taking any action on a representation seeking implementation of a civil court's orders, ensuring that police do not unfairly interfere in a purely civil dispute.
Headnote:(A) Police Protection - Civil Dispute - Implementation of decree - Directing respondent police to provide an opportunity of hearing to affected parties before taking action on a representation is necessary to ensure fairness when a party apprehends their property rights may be adversely affected by the execution of a decree in a civil suit. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to an opportunity of hearing before the police act upon a representation made by the respondent for implementation of a civil court order.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioners argued respondent suppressed facts and may seek relief affecting their property; police submitted no representation made. (Para 4 )
3. Court observed dispute was civil in nature and directed police to issue notice and hear petitioners before taking action. (Para 5 )
4. Police must afford opportunity of hearing to affected parties before acting on court-directed representations in civil disputes. (Para 5 )
5. Writ petition disposed of with direction that police issue notice and hear petitioners before acting on any representation. (Para 5 , 6 )
6. Must police afford a hearing to third parties before acting on a representation permitted by a court order?
Yes, the court directed that if any representation is received, the police shall issue notice to affected parties, afford them an opportunity to place their contentions, consider them, and then act. (Para 5 )
7. Will police interfere in purely civil disputes?
No, the court and the police both acknowledged that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and the police will not interfere in a civil dispute. (Para 4 , 5 )
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent No.3 to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, if respondent No.4 makes any representation pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.32133 of 2026, dated 24.09.2026.
2. Heard Sri S. Srinivas Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents No.1 to 3.
3. Learned Senior Counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners are the owners of Plot No.2 Part, admeasuring 302.24 square yards, in Sy.No.287/U, situated at Khanapuram Havelli Village and Gram Panchayat, Khammam Urban Mandal, Khammam District. It is submitted that respondent No.4 filed a suit i.e., O.S.No.29 of 2023 for specific performance in respect of Ac.0.14 gunta of land in Sy.No.287/4 against the defendants therein and that the said suit was decreed ex parte. It is further submitted that respondent No.4 filed E.P.No.146 of 2024 and seeking police protection for implementation of the orders passed in E.P., respondent No.4 filed W.P.No.32133 of 2026 and this Court, having observed that no representation had been made by the petitioner therein to the police seeking police protection, permitted petitioner therein/respondent No.4 herein to make a representation to the respondent police and directed that, if such representation is made, the respondent police shall take action strictly in accordance with law.
3.1 Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner in W.P.No.32133 of 2026 suppressed the fact that E.A.No.93 of 2026 in W.P.No.146 of 2024 had already been filed seeking possession of the subject property. It is also submitted that, pursuant to the orders passed in the Execution Petition, the document has already been registered in favour of respondent No.4. It is apprehended by the petitioners that, under the guise of seeking implementation of the orders passed by this Court, respondent No.4 may seek relief affecting the property of the petitioners. Learned Senior Counsel is therefore seeking a direction to the respondent police to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and consider their contentions before taking any action pursuant to any representation made by respondent No.4.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on oral instructions, submitted that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.32133 of 2026, dated 24.09.2026, respondent No.4 has not made any representation to the respondent police till date. It is further submitted that, even from a perusal of the writ affidavit, it is evident that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and that the police will not interfere in the civil dispute.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having considered the submissions made, this Court directs that, if any representation is received from respondent No.4 pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.32133 of 2026, dated 24.09.2026, the respondent police shall issue notice to the petitioners herein, afford them an opportunity to place their contentions, consider the same and thereafter take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law.
6. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
