Sarika Apparao vs Gumpina Varalakshmi
2023 Latest Caselaw 2121 AP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI


HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                            &
                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA


                         WRIT APPEAL No.415 of 2023
                                  (Through physical mode)

Sri Sarika Apparao,
S/o. late Tathilu, aged about 65 years,
R/o. Neralavalasa Village, Padmanabham Mandal,
Vishakapatnam District, and others.
                                                            .. Appellants
       Versus

Gumpina Vara Lakshmi,
W/o. Ramesh Guptha, aged about 50 years,
R.o. Anakapalli Town, Vishakapatnam District,
and others.
                                                            .. Respondents

ORAL JUDGMENT

Dt: 20.04.2023 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 16.03.2023

passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.2077 of 2023.

2. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein,

questioning the inaction of the Station House Officer, Padmanabham Police

Station, Visakhapatnam (respondent No.3 in the writ petition) in providing

police protection for construction of compound wall to the writ petitioners'

agricultural dry land covered by Sy.No.17/4 (Ac.1.38 cents), Sy.No.18

(Ac.8.69 cents), Sy.No.20/2 (Ac.3.98 cents), Sy.No.20/1 (Ac.0.14 cents), HCJ & NJS,J

altogether to an extent of Ac.14.19 cents, situated at Nerellavalasa Village,

Padmanabham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pursuant to the writ

petitioners' representations dated 10.10.2022 and 05.11.2022, and for a

consequential direction to the said Station House Officer to provide police

protection for the purpose indicated. By the order under appeal, the learned

single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the concerned

police to dispose of the representation of the writ petitioners within a period

of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Aggrieved

thereby, respondent Nos.5 to 8 in the writ petition filed the present writ

appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the order under

appeal has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the

appellants, while civil dispute is pending between them and the writ

petitioners in relation to the subject property.

4. Considering the fact that the appellants were not provided an

opportunity of hearing before passing of the order under appeal and also

taking into account the fact that no positive direction was issued under the

order appeal and it only directs the concerned police to dispose of the writ

petitioners' representation, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of

justice would be met if the appellants are provided an opportunity of hearing

at the time of consideration of the representation of the writ petitioners by

the concerned police in terms of the order under appeal.

HCJ & NJS,J

5. Accordingly, we direct that the concerned police shall afford an

opportunity of hearing to the appellants herein while deciding the

representation of the writ petitioners in terms of the direction issued by the

learned single Judge. We further direct that till a decision is taken on the

representation of the writ petitioners, the concerned police shall not get

themselves involved in the dispute between the parties in relation to the

subject property.

6. With the above directions, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ                           NINALA JAYASURYA, J

                                                                               IBL