R.Sathyavel v. The Principal Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:19.03.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.7527 of 2019 R.Sathyavel ...Petitioner Vs.

1.The Principal Secretary Department of Home Secretariat St. George, Fort Chennai 2.The Director General of Police Police Head Quarters Kamarajar Salai Mylapore, Chennai 3.The Inspector General of Police North Zone Chennai 4.The Superintendent of Police Vellore Vellore District 5.The Superintendent of Police Thoothukudi Thoothukudi District 6.R.Ravichandran Deputy Superintendent of Police Maniyachi Sub-Division Thoothukudi District ... Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus, for order or direction in the nature of writ, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 25.08.2018 by conducting enquiry against the 6th respondent in a fair manner and to initiate department action against the 6th respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sathish Kumar For Respondents: Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz for R1 to 5 Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of mandamus, for order or direction in the nature of writ, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 25.08.2018 by conducting enquiry against the 6th respondent in a fair manner and to initiate department action against the 6th respondent. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 6th respondent who was the then Inspector of Police at K.V.Kuppam Police Station, Vellore District, joined hands with anti social elements involved in the activities against the law.

The petitioner preferred several representations to the respondents and other higher authorities, but the respondents did not discharge their duty to dispose of the representation by conducting a fair and unbiased enquiry and initiating appropriate departmental action against the 6th respondent. The 6th respondent taking note of the complaint, started to harass the petitioner and his family members with dire consequences using the power of the police. Hence this petition. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner is the history sheeter. His representation is to take action as against the Deputy Superintendent of Police i.e. the 6th respondent herein.

4.Heard the learned counsel on either side.

5.It is seen from the records that the petitioner is the history sheeter. He made several representations to take action against the 6th respondent herein, who is none other than the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Maniyachi Sub-Division, Thoothukudi District. Hence, this Writ petition cannot be entertained by this Court. This petition is devoid of merits. 6.Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kas

To 1.The Principal Secretary Department of Home Secretariat St. George, Fort Chennai 2.The Director General of Police Police Head Quarters Kamarajar Salai Mylapore, Chennai 3.The Inspector General of Police North Zone Chennai 4.The Superintendent of Police Vellore Vellore District 5.The Superintendent of Police Thoothukudi Thoothukudi District 6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

+1cc to Mr.M.Sathish Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 25827 W.P.No.7527 of 2019 BR(CO) GN(02/05/2019)