IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 12512 of 2007(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ABYCHEN VARGHESE, KAVUMKAL, EDAKADATHI P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.V.K.SUNIL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DY. S.P., KANJIRAPPALLY. 4. MR. SAINUDHEEN, S.I. OF POLICE, ERUMELI POLICE STATION. 5. MARYKUTTY JOSEPH, CHEMMANAPALLIYIL, VENKURINJI P.O., MANIPPUZHA, ERUMELI. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. V. TEKCHAND. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 12512 of 2007 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 8th day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayer of the petitioner, who claims to be a public spirited citizen, is for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry into the misconducts of the 4th respondent, as highlighted in Exhibit P2 representation and to take appropriate action against him on the basis of such enquiry. Absolutely no locus standi is established for seeking such a relief, particularly, when the alleged misconduct and the scope of disciplinary action against the delinquent would come within the exclusive jurisdiction of the employer and not for a stranger to intrude. 2. When the above matter came up for admission before this Court on 11.04.2007, it was sought to be adjourned at the instance of the petitioner, to be posted after the mid-summer vacation. No further steps are seen taken from the part of the petitioner to have it had brought up for admission causing issuance of notice to the respondents for adjudication on merits. It appears that the petitioner is no more interested with the alleged grievance projected in the above writ petition. In the above circumstance, no interference is called for and the W.P. (C) is dismissed accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd.