Madras High CourtWP(MD)/15641/2018dismissed

Amatchiar v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu

2018-08-06Honourable Mr Justice V. Parthiban2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.08.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.(MD) No.15641 of 2018 Amatchiar ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary Home Department Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9 2.The Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli District 3.Prema Inspector of Police PEW, Alangulam Tirunelveli District 4.Mahendran Sub-Inspector of Police Tisaiyanvilai Police Station Tisayanvilai, Tirunelveli District ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate actions against 4th respondent by considering the representation dated 17.2.2018 within a stipulated time.

For Petitioner :

Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For Respondents :

Mr.S.Angappan Government Advocate for R1 & R2

O R D E R

Mr.S.Angappan, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Notice to the respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with in view of nature of the order to be passed by this Court.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3. The petitioner has approached this Court with the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the fourth respondent by considering his representation dated 17.02.2018.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. This Court is unable to appreciate that such a prayer can be conceived. It appears that the petitioner has some issues with the fourth respondent with regard to discharge of his duties against him. Further, it appears that the petitioner, in view of certain action taken against him by the fourth respondent, has given a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against him. But, the respondents 1 and 2 have not taken any action on the petitioner's representation sofar. Therefore, he is approaching this Court by seeking a seemingly innocuous prayer to get some kind of a direction to take action against the fourth respondent. This Court is of the view that a veiled attempt by the petitioner to get some direction from this Court cannot be entertained, as that would amount to interfering with the personal scores to be settled between the petitioner and the fourth respondent. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-III) To:

1.The Secretary, Home Department , Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District.

+1cc to M/S.T.A.Ebenezer, Advocate SR.No. 77618 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 77521 W.P.(MD) No.15641 of 2018 06.08.2018 krk JM/KAK/SAR 3/27.08.2018/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/