Sri Kanala Ambujodhar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana,
2022 Latest Caselaw 114 Tel

        THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

                WRIT PETITION No.5658 OF 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to declare inaction of the

respondents-Police in not providing police protection to the

petitioners in order to safeguard the property in Sy.No.112/RU1

admeasuring 1.271/2 guntas, Sy.No.112/RUU2 admeasuring

2.071/2 guntas, Sy.No.112/RU2 admeasuring 1.271/2 guntas

and Sy.No.112/RUU3A admeasuring 2.071/2 guntas, total

admeasuring Ac.7.30 guntas situated at Hathnoora Village and

Mandal, Sanga Reddy district (hereinafter referred as 'the

subject property'), despite repeated requests made by the

petitioner, as illegal.

2. Heard Sri V.T.Kalyan, learned counsel for the

petitioners, Jalli Kanakaiah, learned counsel appearing for

respondent Nos.4 to 15 and Sri S.Ram Mohan, learned Assistant

Government Pleader for Home and perused the record.

3. The petitioners herein are claiming that they are

absolute owners and possessors of the subject property. They

are claiming that they have purchased the said property under

registered sale deed bearing document No.1190 of 2006, dated

02.02.2006. It is further contended by the petitioners that they

are in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the subject

property. When they tried to fence the land, the unofficial

respondents started interfering with their possession over the

subject property. Therefore, the petitioners herein have filed a

suit vide O.S.No.82 of 2018 before the learned Junior Civil

Judge, Narsapur, seeking perpetual injunction. They have also

filed an application vide I.A.No.278 of 2018 in the said suit

seeking ad-interim injunction restraining the unofficial

respondents from interfering with the subject property. The

Court below, vide order dated 05.09.2018 granted ex parte ad-

interim injunction and the presence of the unofficial

respondents was also recorded in the said order. The said order

is neither challenged nor implemented. Despite the said order,

the unofficial respondents are creating disturbance and trying to

interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the

petitioners over the subject property. They have submitted

representation to 3rd respondent-Police with a request to provide

Police aid. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said

representation, 3rd respondent did not act upon it. Therefore, the

present writ petition.

4. Respondent Nos.4 to 15 have filed counter contending

that the land in Sy.No.112 of Hathnoora Village and Mandal is

inam land and the claim of individuals for issuance of

Occupancy Rights Certificate to the eligible persons was not

decided. In fact, the revenue authorities themselves are unable

to assess the genuineness of the claims etc. Therefore, the claim

of the petitioners is untenable. Notices in O.S.No.82 of 2018

were not served on all the defendants therein. It is further

contended that as per the orders, dated 07.11.2014 of the

Revenue Divisional Officer, the entire land in Sy.No.112 is with

Government. Therefore, the question of conducting survey by

the Tahsildar by deputing Mandal Surveyor is nothing but

collection of evidence. Until and unless the interim injunction is

not made absolute, the petitioners are not entitled for police

protection. With the said contentions, the respondent Nos.4 to

15 sought to dismiss the present Writ Petition.

5. A perusal of record would reveal that the petitioners

herein, claiming to be owners of the subject property, filed the

above said suit vide O.S.No.82 of 2018 against the unofficial

respondents herein seeking perpetual injunction. In the said

suit, the petitioners herein have also filed a petition vide

I.A.No.278 of 2018 seeking interim injunction. The Court below,

vide order dated 05.09.2018 granted ex parte ad-interim

injunction in favour of the petitioners restraining unofficial

respondents herein from interfering with the peaceful possession

and enjoyment of the petitioners over the subject property till

25.09.2018.

6. The unofficial respondents have not filed their counters

in I.A.No.278 of 2018 and written statements in the suit. In fact,

on 30.04.2019, Defendant Nos.1 and 2/respondent Nos.14 and

5 herein were present and sought final chance for engaging

counsel. Defendant Nos.3, 6, 7, 11 and 12 are set ex parte and

fresh summons were ordered to defendant Nos.4, 5, 8, 9 and 10

in the said suit. On 22.07.2019, the said suit was posted for

service of summons on defendant Nos.4, 5 and 8 to 30.09.2019.

Thereafter, the said suit is posted along with Interlocutory

Applications and it was adjourned from time to time. On

07.12.2020, the Court below recorded that the plaintiff counsel

submitted that he is pursuing to ascertain correct address of

Defendant Nos.4, 5 and 8 and posted the suit to 08.02.2021.

Thereafter, the matter was adjourned due to the present COVID-

19 pandemic situation and due to Standard Operating

Procedure (SOP) issued by this Court from time to time.

7. Perusal of record would also reveal that the petitioners

herein have filed a petition in O.S.No.82 of 2018 seeking

appropriate orders allowing the petitioners to avail Police

protection from the Station House Officer, Hathnoora village and

Mandal, i.e. 3rd respondent herein. It was filed on 25.02.2021

vide CFR No.184 of 2021 and the asme was numbered as

I.A.No.108 of 2021.

8. It is also relevant to note that the petitioners herein

have lodged a complaint with the 3rd respondent on 05.07.2019

complaining about the trespass, obstruction and interference by

the unofficial respondents. In the said complaint, it is mentioned

that when the petitioners were cleaning, leveling and fencing the

land as per the boundaries fixed based on the land survey

panchanama conducted under the directions of the Tahasildar,

Hathnoora Mandal, in the presence of the Deputy Inspector from

the office of the Assistant Director, Land Survey, Sangareddy

and the unofficial respondents interfered with their possession

and obstructed the said fencing. Therefore, the petitioners

herein requested 3rd respondent to take action. On receipt of the

said complaint, after making entry in the General Diary, 3rd

respondent has requested the Tahasildar, Hathnoora Mandal, to

visit the spot and to conduct survey of land in Sy.No.112 and

fixed boundaries of the land for Law and Order purpose.

9. The above said facts would reveal that the order dated

05.09.2018 is an ex parte order and the same was extended

until further orders by recording the presence of unofficial

respondents herein. In the suit, the Court below has ordered

fresh summons to some of the defendants. It is also relevant to

note that the Tahasildar, Hathnoora Mandal, vide Lr.No.

B/1445/2019, dated 06.08.2019, basing on the report of the

Girdarvar, Hathnoor village and Village Revenue Officer,

Hathnoora village, dated 31.08.2019 specifically mentioned that

the petitioners herein are joint owners and possessors of the

subject land and the same is ascertained through all the

registered documents, pattadar passbook, revenue records and

they are in physical possession. At present, the said land kept

fallow and the details of the extent, survey number, name of the

pattadar and name of the occupant etc., are specifically

mentioned in the tabular form in the said letter. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has also filed the said report, dated

31.07.2019 and 11.01.2019.

10. A perusal of record would also reveal that the

predecessors in title of the petitioners herein have filed a suit

O.S.No.18 of 1997 against some of the unofficial respondents

and others seeking perpetual injunction and the same was

decreed on 04.10.2002. According to the learned counsel for the

petitioners, no appeal was preferred against the said decree and

judgment, dated 04.10.2002 in O.S.No.18 of 1997. Therefore, it

had attained finality.

11. The above stated facts would reveal that the petitioners

herein are claiming right and possession over the subject

property. There is ad-interim injunction granted in I.A.No.278 of

2018 in O.S.No.82 of 2018 by the Court below. It is also relevant

to note that the petitioners herein have filed a petition vide

I.A.No.108 of 2021 in I.A.No.278 of 2018 in O.S.No.82 of 2018

seeking Police protection in the month of February,2021 and the

Court below has not been able to expediently consider the said

Interlocutory Application of the petitioners. Therefore, they have

filed the present writ petition.

12. There is no dispute with regard to the power of this

Court to grant Police aid by invoking its extraordinary

jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The

Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in Satyanarayana Tiwari Vs.

SHO, P.S.Santosh Nagar, Hyderabad1, Kotak Mahindra Bank

Vs. Station House Officer2 and in A.Bharathi Vs.State of

Telangana3 confirmed vide order dated 24.10.2016 in

W.A.No.1066 of 2016 and also the Hon'ble Apex Court in PR

Muralidharan Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar4.

AIR 1982 AP 394 DB

2016 (1) ALD 696 DB

2017 (1) ALD 503

2006 (4) SCC 501

Ritish Tewari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh5, Union of India Vs.

Maj. Gen. Madan Lal Yadav6 and Devendra Kumar Vs. State

of Uttaranchal7 categorically held that this Court is having

power to grant police protection under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. Therefore, there is no dispute with regard

to said principle.

13. As discussed above, the petitioners herein are claiming

right over the subject property and they have an injunction in

their favour. But it is not an order on merits after contest. It was

an ex parte order and made absolute for non-filing of counter. It

is relevant to note that the petitioners herein have filed

I.A.No.108 of 2021 in I.A.No.278 of 2018 in O.S.No.82 of 2018

seeking Police protection on the ground that despite injunction,

the unofficial respondents are interfering with their possession

and obstructing fencing etc., and despite submission of specific

representation, 3rd respondent-Police are not providing them

Police protection. In the said petition I.A.No.108 of 2021, the

petitioners herein have specifically contended that despite the

said orders, unofficial respondents, their ladies are interfering

with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners

over the subject property continuously and due to which the

petitioners herein are not in position to conduct agricultural

operations. The said I.A.No.108 of 2021 filed on 25.02.2021 vide

CFR No.184 of 2021.

2010 (10) SCC 677

1996 (4) SCC 127

2013 (9) SCC 366

14. Now the only grievance of the petitioners herein is that

though it was filed in the month of February, 2021 seeking

Police aid, the Court below has not been able to expediently

consider the same and therefore, they have approached this

Court by filing the present Writ Petition. Thus, the petitioners

are pursuing parallel remedies. The petitioners herein cannot file

the present writ petition seeking police protection on the ground

that the Court below is not taking up the Police aid application

filed by the petitioners herein vide I.A.No.108 of 2021 as

expeditiously as possible. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the

said inaction of the Court below, they have to avail other

remedies available under the provisions of the Code of Civil

Procedure (for short, 'the CPC'). But not by way of filing the

present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

15. As discussed above, the suit is pending. Some of the

unofficial respondents who are defendants in the suit, have

appeared and they sought time to file counter. There are rival

claims with regard to title and possession of the said property

between the parties. Therefore, according to this Court, the

petitioners herein have to pursue the said I.A.No.108 of 2021 in

I.A.No.278 of 2018 in O.S.No.82 of 2018, but not in the present

writ petition.

16. In view of the said discussion, this Writ Petition is

disposed of directing the learned Junior Civil Judge, Narsapur,

Sanga Reddy district, to decide I.A.No.108 of 2021 in I.A.No.278

of 2018 in O.S.No.82 of 2018 pending before him, as

expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two

months from the date of copy of this order by following the

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) issued by this Court from

time to time. Petitioners and respondent Nos.4 to 15 are at

liberty to take all the pleas and grounds raised in the present

writ petition before the Court below.

17. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending, shall also

stand closed.

__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J Date:17.01.2022 Vvr