Judgment : 1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Additional Government Pleader for the Respondents. 2. According to the Petitioner, he and six others are the co-owners of the landed property situated in S.No.272, Thovarangurichi village group, Manaparai Taluk, Trichy District to an extent of 4.78 acres. There are other joint owners and the said land is the Petitioner's ancestral property. During the year 1914, the said property was purchased by the Petitioner's grand father from one Pandaram for a valuable sale consideration and by means of a registered sale deed dated 2/4/1914 and the same is in their possession and enjoyment from the date of purchase onwards till today. 3. The version of the Petitioner is that during the year 1995, the Trustees of Vellai Vinayagar Temple, Thovarangurichi themselves declared that the said land belongs to the Temple after creating a forged-cum-fabricated documents and they filed a suit in O.S.No.109 of 1998 on the file of the Learned District Munsif Court, Manaparai and the same was dismissed. Later, A.S.No.185 of 2010 was filed before the First Appellate Court viz., the First Additional Sub-Court, Trichy and the same was also dismissed on 19/6/2014. In deed, the Learned First Appellate Authority was pleased to declare that the said land belong to the Petitioner and others. 4. The plea of the Petitioner is that on 5/9/2014 at about 12/30 p.m., with the instigation of the Trustees of Vellai Vinayagar Temple, Thovarangurichi, one S.P.Dhandapani and 20 others, criminally trespassed into their land and damaged Karuvela trees and tried to steal them. As such, the concerned Accused have committed an offence under Sections 147, 148, 427, 451, 452 and 506 (ii) of I.P.C and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act. Thereafter, the Petitioner, on 6/9/2014, gave a complaint to the Second Respondent in lieu thereof. Also that on 10/9/2014, he sent a representation to the First Respondent to take necessary action against the concerned Accused for interfering in the aforesaid properties. That apart, he filed a complaint on the same date with the Second Respondent to provide Police protection to him and his property, however, no tangible action was taken. 5. Also that on 10/9/2014, he sent a representation to the First Respondent to take necessary action against the concerned Accused for interfering in the aforesaid properties. That apart, he filed a complaint on the same date with the Second Respondent to provide Police protection to him and his property, however, no tangible action was taken. 5. In view of the fact that the Petitioner seeks a limited relief in the present Writ Petition viz., praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the First Respondent to provide Police protection to the Petitioner and his property on the basis of his representation, as referred to supra, this Court in the interest of Justice and Fair Play, directs the Respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 10/9/2014 in a fair, just and dispassionate manner and to provide necessary Police protection to the Petitioner and his property, of course at the cost of the Petitioner. 6. It is also open to the Petitioner to give a fresh representation to the concerned Respondent to seek for Police protection to him and for the property and as and when such representation is made by the Petitioner, the Respondents without any hesitation whatsoever are directed to provide necessary Police protection to the Petitioner and his property, of course, at the cost of the Petitioner. 7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.