JUDGMENT T Vinod Kumar, J. - The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 3rd respondent-Station House Officer, Matwada Police Station, Warangal District, in not considering the petitioner's written complaints dated 22.06.2020, 30.06.2020 and 08.07.2020 by registering FIR, as being illegal and arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India, with a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the said complaints by registering a crime against the respondents 4 to 9 forthwith. 2. The above case is taken up for hearing today i.e., 16.07.2020, through Video Conferencing. 3. Heard Sri L.V. Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed two suits before the competent civil Court having jurisdiction against the unofficial respondents herein, but due to his ill-health during the year 2017, the said two suits were dismissed for default and the petitioner has filed restoration petitions therein and the same are pending consideration since 2017 for service of notices to the defendants/respondents therein. While the said civil disputes are pending in respect of the open plot of the land before the competent civil Court, the people named in the complaint dated 22.06.2020 (i.e. unofficial respondents herein) is trying to trespass into his plot without any authority with an intention to grab the same and demolished boundary poles and sought for registering a case and for taking necessary action thereon. Since no action is taken so far, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has forwarded to this Court by e-mail Written Instructions dated 16.07.2020 under the signature of 3rd respondent. By the said written instructions, it is stated that the claim of the petitioner with regard to the land having been purchased from its predecessors-in-interest is in dispute before the competent civil Court and in the said suits filed by the petitioner bearing O.S. No.163 of 2011 and O.S.No.561 of 2013 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge's Court, Warangal, the petitioner was unable to secure any orders against the unofficial respondents and as a matter of fact, the said two suits were dismissed for nonprosecution. 6. 6. By the written instructions, it is stated that the claim of the petitioner with respect to land admeasuring 807 square yards in Survey No.766/2 of Hanumakonda village having been sold to him by one Smt. K. Renuka Devi, wife of K. Chandrasekhar on the basis of a sada sale deed itself is in question as the said K. Renuka Devi sold her share of land to an extent of 1613 square yards by two registered sale deeds in favour of the petitioner and his son and the land to an extent of 807 square yards which is being claimed by the petitioner, through her brother D. Yugander need to be adjudicated upon by the competent civil Court and since the matter is civil in nature, the 3rd respondent authority advised the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court for redressing his grievance. 7. By the written instructions, it is stated that the petitioner instead of approaching the competent civil Court of jurisdiction to establish his claim of title over the land, has filed the present writ petition alleging that the 3rd respondent authority has not registered a case, based on his complaint which was informed to him as civil in nature as noted above. 8. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would further submit that though the petitioner was advised to approach the competent civil Court to redress his grievance as civil in nature, the 3rd respondent authority would also send a communication of the said fact to the petitioner to enable him to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law. 9. Having regard to the submissions made as above, considering the fact that there are inter se civil disputes relating to the title of the property, it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court of jurisdiction upon receiving a written communication from the 3rd respondent authority with regard to the action taken on his complaint dated 22.06.2020 by availing remedies in accordance with law. 10. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 11. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed in the light of this final order.