IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 16090 of 2001 Between: C.Hanumantha Rao S/o Bhaskar Rao R/o 3-2-186, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda Post, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad. 2 The Asst. Commissioner of Police, Mirchowk Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Circle Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad. 4 The Sub-Inspector of Police (D.S.I.), Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the R1 & 2 herein in not taking any action against to the principles of natural justice besides violative of art 14 & 19 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents herein not to harass and interfere illegally with the peaceful life and liberty of the petitioner and his family members and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VOOSA.RAGHU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner gave a representation dated 01.08.2001 to respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein complaining against respondent Nos.3 and 4. He alleged that respondent Nos.3 and 4 took the petitioner into custody on 19.07.2001 at 11.00 A.M. and confined him illegally till 21.07.2001 and that he is having a threat from respondent Nos.3 and 4. Alleging that no action was taken against respondent Nos.3 and 4, the present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take appropriate action. There cannot be any denial that the first respondent is the Chief of Hyderabad City Police and it is his duty to see that all the Police Officers working under him in various places performed their duties in accordance with law. He is also the disciplinary authority in respect of certain categories of employees below the rank of Inspector of Police. Therefore, it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to look into the representation made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition with the above observations and directions is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 15.06.2005 vs To 1 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad. 2 The Asst. Commissioner of Police, Mirchowk Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Circle Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad. 4 The Sub-Inspector of Police (D.S.I.), Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad. 5 Two CCs to the G.P for Home, High Court of A.P., Hydrabad(O.U.T). 6 2 CD copies.