CWP No.4145 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.4145 of 2010 Date of decision: 23.4.2010 Inderjeet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) The petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the official respondents to take appropriate action against respondents No.7 to 14 for the alleged acts of omission and commission; alternatively a direction has been sought to decide representation dated 25.2.2010, Annexure P-4 as also to register an FIR against respondents No.9 to 14. Inter alia, it has been prayed that a writ of quo warranto be issued to remove respondents No.7 & 8 from their office. It has been averred in the writ petition that respondents No.9 and 10, who are Ex-Sarpanch and Ex-Panch of the village respectively, have embezzled government funds in collusion with respondents No.7, 8 and 11 to 14. Thus, appropriate action needs to be taken against them. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in view of the allegations against respondents No.7 to 14, appropriate action CWP No.4145 of 2010 2 needs to be taken against them. He has also referred to detailed representation, Annexure P-4, submitted to Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar in this regard. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. The petitioner has levelled very general and vague allegations against respondents No.7 to 14 and has sought action against them. There is neither any material on record in proof of any of the allegations nor any document has been referred to in support thereof. The petition is totally vague and thus deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs. However, this court is refraining from imposing the costs as it feels that the petitioner may not have been correctly advised. The prayer for direction to register an FIR is equally misplaced in view of law laid down in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & others, 2008 (1) R.C.R. 392. The petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 23.4.2010 'rajpal'