Gundala Akhil Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

“…to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly 3rd respondent in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent in respect of 16 cents out of Ac 3 10 cents in Sy No 166/2 of Botlagatla village Putchanuthala panchayat Nuzendla mandal Palanadu district at the instance of the 4th respondent without any authority without any valid reason or ground without any case being registered as illegal unjust arbitrary highhanded malafide and against statutory provisions and consequently direct the respondents particularly 3rd respondent not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent in respect of 16 cents out of Ac 3 10 cents in Sy No 166/2 of Botlagatla village Putchanuthala panchayat Nuzendla mandal Palanadu district and pass….”

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

¶30

Sri L.J. Veera Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that respondent No.3 is interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4 in respect of an extent of Ac.0.16 cents out of Ac.3.10 cents in Sy.No.166/2 of Botlagatla Village, Putchanuthala Panchayat, Nuzendla Mandal, Palnadu District.

¶31

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the father of the petitioner lodged a PGRS complaint on 09.02.2026 and the same was endorsed to the Station House Officer, Inavolu Police Station, for enquiry. It is further submitted that the

¶32

3

¶33

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3962 of 2026 Dated 18.02.2026

¶34

respondent police received a Dial 100 call on 06.02.2026 at about 10:40 a.m. Based on the said call, the respondent police deputed staff to the disputed site and pacified the situation. Upon receipt of the PGRS petition, respondent No.3 called the petitioner only for the purpose of conducting a preliminary enquiry. During the enquiry, it was revealed that a civil dispute is pending between the petitioner and the respondent No.4.

¶35

Considering the above submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.3 not to further call the petitioner at the behest of respondent No.4 in connection with the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and respondent No.4.

¶36