Dismissed

Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare Association, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC21 Mar 2012WP/4473/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking a directive for police protection. The court held that since the alleged interfering individuals were not named as respondents, the petitioner could not seek mandamus against the respondents to affect pending defendants in a civil suit.

What did the court decide?

None; the request for police protection directs was rejected.

Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.4473 of 2012

¶3

Date : 21.03.2012

¶4

Between :

¶5

Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare Association, Hyderabad, rep. by its President.

¶6

…..Petitioner

¶7

And

¶8

The Government of Andhra Pradesh,

¶9

rep. by its Principal Secretary for Home & others.

¶10

…..Respondents

¶11

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4473 of 2012

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

This writ petition is filed, seeking directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not providing Police protection to the petitioner-Association, namely, ‘Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare Association’, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶14

When the matter was listed on earlier occasion, it was adjourned to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, to obtain instructions. Today, when the matter is taken up, based on the written instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that the petitionerAssociation has filed a suit in O.S.No.1549 of 2010 on the file of the VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for grant of injunction against M/s.M.Joshua, K.Amos, T.Vijaya Rao, K.Therus Abraham and I.Solomon, and the same is pending.

¶15

In this writ petition, it is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that those five named individuals are interfering with the activities of the petitioner-Welfare Association, and in that view of the matter, a representation has been filed before the Police for grant of Police protection, but the Police are not providing any protection.

¶16

In this case, it is to be noticed that though the aforesaid suit is filed against five individuals, those persons are not even made as party-respondents in this writ petition. In that view of the matter, on the allegation that the persons who are not made parties to the writ petition, are interfering, petitioner cannot seek any Mandamus against the respondents herein, which will affect the defendants in the suit pending before the civil Court.

¶17

For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶18

___________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶19

21^st March 2012 ajr

Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare Association, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jehovah Nissi Christian Welfare Association, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gorla Swarnamma Vs Mr. I.Bhaktavatsala Reddy

M/s. Brandix India Apparel City Private Limited., Vs The District Collector

Mohd. Nizam Vs The Deptuy Commissioner of Police

chand Bee, Vs The Commissioner of Police

K. Venkateswara Rao , Raju Vs Government of Andhra PRadesh

M/s. Gurubani Security Private Limited, Vs The Regional Manager (Eando.S)