Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/20882/2019 of Vensa Biotech Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2019
SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Writ Petition No.20882 of 2019 ORDER: 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, to declare the action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 at the behest of sixth respondent involving in civil disputes, threatening the petitioners
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHYWrit Petition No.20882 of 2019
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, to declare the action of respondent Nos.4 and 5 at the behest of sixth respondent involving in civil disputes, threatening the petitioners to hand over land to sixth respondent, contrary to order of this Court in W.P No.30935 of 2011, threatening to implicate the petitioners in false cases, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, consequently direct respondent Nos.4 and 5 not to interfere with civil disputes.
2. Though the petitioners made several serious allegations against respondent Nos.4 to 6, this Court need not advert to those allegations to find out the truth or otherwise, in view of written instructions, placed on record by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home dated 26.12.2019, alleging that petition was received in Spandana programme, the same was forwarded to concerned Station House Officer to enquire into. On enquiry, the concerned Station House Officer, came to know that the dispute is purely civil in nature, therefore respondent Nos.4 and 5 cannot take any further action. As the dispute is purely civil in nature, police are not interfering with civil dispute between petitioner and sixth respondent, with regard to land. However, the truth or otherwise in the allegations made in the writ petition need not be decided, in view of submission of learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
3. In view of facts and circumstances, stated above, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are directed not to interfere with civil disputes between 2 MSM, J
petitioner and sixth respondent with regard to property in Sy.No.491/1, 491/2 and 493/3 of Samarlakota, East Godavari District.
4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
5. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Dated 31.12.2019 Rvk