Gurajala Venkateswara Rao, v. The Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance Department,

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.11855 OF 2015 DATED:22.4.2015 Between:

Gurajala Venkateswara Rao ... Petitioner And The Union of India Ministry of Finance Department Department of Financial Services Rep. by its Secretary 3rd Floor, Jeevandeep Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 and others ... Respondents

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.11855 OF 2015 ORDER: (per the Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT of

MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents 1 to 14 and call for the records pertaining to Bhu-adipathi Scheme from the respondent No.10 by personal appearance as the Real Estate Business of the Respondents 18 to 22 is allowed freely to run without any control thereby causing enormous loss in general including the petitioner taking into consideration of the Chit Fund Scame disputes upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." It is very difficult for us to understand what is the relief sought for in the prayer portion. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that he really wants to challenge the vires of the Chit Fund Act.

But, nothing is found in the prayer in that direction. According to us, if any vires is challenged, it must be mentioned in the main prayer itself, not in the body of the petition. Moreover, we find from the statement and averment made in the affidavit in support of the writ petition is absolutely confusing, contradictory and directionless and there is no correlation with the prayer either. It is difficult for us to entertain this sort of action. We therefore dismiss the writ petition. However, we give liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh one with correct and understandable approach by the Court. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

________________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 22.4.2015 bnr