IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35836 of 2010(D) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K.S.FEROSH KHAN,S/O.K.M.SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 32 YEARS,KALARIKKAL HOUSE,NETTOOR.P.O,NETTOOR DESOM,MARADU VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. V.K.SALAM,S/O.KOCHUPILLAI,AGED 46 YEARS, VELIYATHUKUDIYIL HOUSE,PEZHAKKAPPILLI, MUVATTUPUZHA-686674. 2. SAKKEER,S/O.KOCHUPILLA,AGED 42 YEARS, VELIYATHUKUDIYIL HOUSE,PEZHAKKAPPILLI, MUVATTUPUZHA-686674. 3. SHAJIMON,PRAYIPRA TRANSPORT,AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,PRAYIPRA JUNCTION,PEZHAKKAPPILLY, MUVATTUPUZHA-686674. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-680661. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,ERNAKULAM (RURAL),ALUVA-682013. 6. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,TRANSPORT BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN. R4 TO R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.35836 of 2010-D ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the fourth respondent and his police men and his subordinates not to harass the petitioner unnecessarily. ii) to direct the fifth respondent to consider and dispose of exhibit P1 representation after giving an opportunity to the petitioner for personal hearing. iii) to direct the sixth respondent to conduct a departmental enquiry against the first respondent on the basis of exhibit P2 representation.” 2. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the 2nd respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioner before the 4th respondent alleging cheating. He would further submit that the 4th respondent noted that it is a money dispute in connection with vehicle transaction and that the 4th respondent will not harass the petitioner. We WPC 35836/2010 -2- record the said submission. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1and 2 would submit that it is actually a case of the petitioner harassing the Ist respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction may be given to the Transport Commissioner to go into Ext.P2. We make it clear that it is open to the petitioner to prosecute the petition before the Transport Commissioner. We also make it clear that we have not expressed anything on the merits of the allegations. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS