IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.25939 of 2006 Between: Sri N. Amarnatha Reddy & others. … Petitioners And The Superintendent of Police, Chittoor, Chittoor District & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri T.C. Krishnan Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent No.2: Smt. D. Seshadri Naidu This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 25939 of 2006 ORDER:- In this writ petition, the petitioners sought for Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in initiating disciplinary proceedings against respondent No.2 on their complaint, as illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioners also sought for a consequential direction to respondent No.1 to take necessary action on their complaint dated 27.10.2006. The complaint of the petitioners was with reference to an incident allegedly taken place in the Zilla Parishad meeting hall, Chittoor on 14.10.2006. The gravamen of the allegations made by the petitioners against respondent No.2 is that he failed to control certain alleged rowdy and gunda elements, who went in slogan shouting spree against the petitioners. They also alleged that after completion of the meeting, respondent No.2 asked the MLAs and ZPTC members belonging to the Telugu Desham party to remain in their hall for about 30 minutes and that the entire disturbance has taken place on account of the collusion with respondent No.2 by rowdy elements and his inaction in controlling them. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1, it is inter alia stated that the representation by the petitioners on 27.10.2006 was acted upon by issuing proceedings dated 30.11.2006, appointing Sri B. Seshu, Additional Superintendent of Police, Tirupati, to conduct a detailed enquiry into the allegations raised in the said representation and that the enquiry is under progress. It is further stated that as soon as the report is received, necessary action will be initiated against the officers responsible. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home reported no instructions as to the present stage of the enquiry. Having regard to the stand taken by respondent No.1 in the counter-affidavit, referred to above, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to take appropriate action on the report, if already submitted by the enquiry officer. If no such report has been submitted so far, he shall take appropriate steps for expeditious submission of the report and take a final decision on such report. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.33295 of 2006 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 29.06.2009 ES