IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.32976 of 2013 BETWEEN Pallagura Hymavathi.
... PETITIONER AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: MR. M. ADAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed alleging that no action is taken by the Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District as per the request of the petitioner, which was forwarded by the Collector, Prakasam to take appropriate action. Petitioner had produced a copy of the Collector’s letter dated 23.03.2013 and her representation to the Collector, along with this writ petition.
2. A reading of the said representation clearly shows that the petitioner is complaining of her vendor not executing sale deed in her name and that the said vendor, allegedly, is removing the fencing around plot No.23, which is alleged to have been purchased by the petitioner. Petitioner, therefore, seeks assistance of the Collector to see that the sale deed for Plot No.23 in Sy.No.123 is executed in her name and in the meantime to restrain the said vendor from selling the said plot to others.
3. The contents of the representation, as referred to above, clearly show that the petitioner is seeking clear remedy with respect to civil rights. I do not see how the Office of the Collector or for that matter the Superintendent of Police can be used by the petitioner for that purpose. I am, therefore, not inclined to entertain the writ petition, as the petitioner has got to approach a competent civil Court for redressal of disputes with regard to her civil rights and if she has any difficulty with regard to taking up such proceedings, she is at liberty to approach the Legal Services Authority at the District concerned.
If the petitioner makes an appropriate application before the District Legal Services Authority, appropriate and necessary assistance be rendered to her by the Legal Services Authority.
Subject to the observations aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J December 15, 2014 Note: Office to mark a copy of the order to the District Legal Services Authority, Prakasam.
(B/o) DSK