IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1566 of 2009 Between: Nagaraju Venkata Rama Raju S/o.Murthy Raju R/o.Nelamuru village Penumantra Mandal, West Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovvur West Godavari District 2 The Tahsildar, Penumantra Mandal, West Godavari District 3 The Station House officer, Penumantra West Godavari District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dated 3.1.2009 submitted by the petitioner for supply of the documents relied on and for issuance of prior notice before initiating any enquiry for the alleged production of take matriculation certificate and interfering with the personal liberty of the petitioner without conducting the enquiry as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice and also the fundamental rights guaranteed under constitution of India consequently directing the respondents not to coercive steps in interfering with the personal liberty of the petitioner and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.V.S.PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: Complaining that respondents 2 and 3 are indiscriminately calling him to their office without issuing notice, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 03- 01-2009 to the 2nd respondent with a request to furnish the material, on the basis of which he is being summoned, and not to call him to the office without issuing notice. The petitioner submits that despite submission of such representation, he is being called by respondents 2 and 3 frequently. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. It appears that Writ Petition No.6447 of 2008 was filed in public interest alleging inter alia that the petitioner secured employment on the basis of a fake certificate. It is stated that respondents 2 and 3 are calling the petitioner in the name of conducting an enquiry. Vexed with that, the petitioner submitted the representation dated 03-01-2009 requesting the 2nd respondent to furnish the material or to issue notice. Unless and until the petitioner is informed of the purpose for his being called, the respondents cannot insist on his appearance. Such a course would certainly affect the personal rights of the petitioner. In case, the respondents have any basis or cause to summon the petitioner, they have to give a written intimation disclosing the purpose of their enquiry or verification. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing that respondents 2 and 3 shall not insist on the petitioner to attend their office, without issuing any written communication. ________ 03.02.2009 Note: Furnish C.C. in three days. (B/O) CBS/KDL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1566 of 2009 Date: 03.02.2009 Note: Furnish C.C. in three days. (B/O) CBS/KDL