Dr.Arumugam, v. The Superintendent Of Police,
W.P.(MD) No.14269 of 2017 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.09.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P.(MD) No.14269 of 2017 Arumugam ... Petitioner -Vs1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Land Grabbing Special Cell, Tirunelveli District.
3.S.Muthulakshmi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 25.02.2017, according to law expeditiously.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Godwin For R1 and R2 : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, Special Government Pleader.
ORDER
Heard Mr.C.Godwin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner and Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. 2.This Writ Petition is filed for a direction to direct the first respondent to dispose of the representation submitted by the writ petitioner, dated 25.02.2017, according to law, expeditiously. 3.According to the writ petitioner, one Rasappa and 14 others cheated him to the tune of Rs.17,40,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakhs and Forty Thousand Only) on false representation with regard to the land measuring 8 acres 73 cents in Survey No.201, Maruhal Kurichi Village. The writ petitioner gave a complaint to the first respondent, which was referred to the third respondent.
According to the writ petitioner, the third respondent compelled the writ petitioner to receive the amount offered by the said Rasappa and settle the matter. When the writ petitioner refused for the said offer, the third respondent received money from Rasappa and closed the complaint, stating falsity in the closure report. The writ petitioner gave a representation on 25.02.2017 to the first respondent to take action against the third respondent and investigate the complaint given by him. However, the first https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.
W.P.(MD) No.14269 of 2017 respondent did not take any action. Hence, the writ petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition.
4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents made a submission that the writ petitioner also gave similar representation to the first respondent on 28.11.2017, making allegation against the Inspector of Police, Land Grabbing Prevention Special Cell, Tirunelveli District. He further submitted that the complaint of the writ petitioner, after being enquired into, was closed. Therefore, the relief sought for in the present Writ Petition is not maintainable and he prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
5.According to the writ petitioner, he has given representation to the first respondent to take action against the third respondent and investigate the complaint given by him. The first respondent did not take any action. It is submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader that the complaint given by the writ petitioner was closed by the third respondent, who is the Sub Inspector of Police, Land Grabbing Cell. According to the writ petitioner, the third respondent closed the complaint given by the writ petitioner, after receiving money from the said Rasappa. Based on the above materials, the relief sought for in the present Writ Petition cannot be granted. However, it is open to the writ petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, for redressing his grievance.
6.In the result, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Land Grabbing Special Cell, Tirunelveli District.
+1 CC to Mr.C.GODWIN, Advocate SR-85996.
+1 CC to GP SR-86117.
W.P.(MD)No.14269 of 2017 09.09.2019 CS(26.09.2019) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2