HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28595 of 2010 Date: 19th November 2010 Between : Tanuku Pattabhi Ramulu. …….Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar & others. ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28595 of 2010 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions against respondents 1 and 2 to take action against respondents 3 and 4 by registering the case for illegal submission of I.T. returns in respect of M/s.I.B.P. Chandra Gupta Service Station, Keshavapatnam village of Shankarapatnam Mandal in Karimnagar District. It is the case of the petitioner that originally he was a dealer of I.B.P. Petroleum outlet from 1978, and in 1995, he appointed respondent No.3 as a Clerk to manage the business of the petrol pump due to his ill-health, and that he has also transferred 49% share in favour of the 3rd respondent in the year 1999. It is the grievance of the petitioner that taking advantage of his ill-health, the 3rd respondent filed I.T. returns, stating as if he was holding 65% of share and the remaining 35% share by his brother i.e. respondent No.4. It is submitted that inspite of his complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar on 27th January 2009, no steps are taken by the Police. A perusal of the complaint itself shows that it is a civil dispute with regard to shareholding in the business concern of the petroleum outlet. Though there was an allegation of threat by respondents 3 and 4 in the representation filed by the petitioner before the Superintendent of Police on 27th January 2009, the very fact that no further instances have taken place, indicates that there are no threats as alleged by the petitioner. It is further to be noticed that except asking for protection, the petitioner did not seek for any relief in the complaint, dated 27th January 2009. There is also no complaint filed before the Station House Officer, and from the representation filed before the Superintendent of Police, it is not a case to direct the Police to investigate. If the petitioner is aggrieved, he can pursue his remedies available under civil law. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, for grant of directions as prayed for. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th November 2010 ajr