Yadandla Gattaiah v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT W.P. No.26891 OF 2018 ORDER:

Heard Mr.R.K.Suri for petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

The petitioner on 07.05.2018 represented to District Collector on his grievances against Vemula Ramana etc. The 2nd respondent through communication No.E/ 1037/ 2018 dated 07.06.2018 called upon the 4th respondent to enquire into the grievance of petitioner and submit detailed report.

The present writ petition is filed complaining inaction against 4th respondent in conducting enquiry and sending report to 2nd respondent.

This Court prima facie is of the view that the invocation of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for either implementation of the letter or complaining against inaction against the letter in the fact situation of the case is completely misconceived. The 2nd respondent communicated proceedings on 07.06.2018. The writ petition is filed on 30.07.2018. This Court, if accepts the prayer and issues a Mandamus or direction, the same would result in the order of this Court clothing the communication as a legally enforceable instrument in the hands of the petitioner. The 4th respondent, if is not enquiring into the matter, as directed by the 2nd respondent, the course of action available in the administrative hierarchy is again to bring to notice of the 2nd

respondent and send reminder for due compliance with the communication already sent by 2nd respondent. In the considered view of this Court, the writ prayer is misconceived. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________ S.V.BHATT,J Date:01.08.2018 Stp