S.Sivakumar, v. The Director General Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :03.06.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.No.13924 of 2019 S.Sivakumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Salai, Kailasapuram, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, DIG Office Vellore Range, Anna Salai, K.K.Nagar, Palavansanthu, Thorapadi, Vellore - 632 001.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Venki Kaal, Thiruvannamalai - 606 604.

4.Venkidesan, Inspector of Police, Peranamallur Police Station, Incharge of Cheyyar Police Station, Peranamallur, Vandavasi Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District - 604 503.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent 1 to 3 to take appropriate departmental inquiry to punish the 4th respondent for misusing his official position and his illegal and high handed acts against the petitioner and his family members on 16.03.2019 without any complaint or authority, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2019. For Petitioner : Mr.Vijayakumar V.

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3, to take action against the 4th respondent. 2.From the averments as contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has grievance against the 4th respondent for failing to discharge his duties as Inspector of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. Some instances were quoted in the affidavit pointing out to the so called fact that the 4th respondent had acted in high handed manner. Several facts were mentioned, which according to this Court, appear to be ipse dixit in nature and the same cannot be probed by this Court in writ proceedings.

3.In any event, this Court cannot act on the basis of self serving averments of the petitioner in order to give direction to the respondents as sought for. From the averments, it appears that the petitioner has an axe to grind against the 4th respondent and in case, he has any specific complaint against the 4th respondent, he may choose to approach the appropriate authority by setting out the actual facts. If at all the petitioner was affected by any specific act on the part of the 4th respondent, it is certainly not open to the writ petitioner to seek a blanket direction as prayed for in the writ petition on the basis of bald averments about the conduct of the 4th respondent in discharging of his duties.

4.In the above circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition, as it is, is not maintainable and therefore, the same is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Sgl To 1.The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Salai, Kailasapuram, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, DIG Office Vellore Range, Anna Salai, K.K.Nagar, Palavansanthu, Thorapadi, Vellore - 632 001.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Venki Kaal, Thiruvannamalai - 606 604.

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.44980 W.P.No.13924 of 2019 GJ(CO) RRS(24/06/2019)