1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.07.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD).No.7371 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011 J.Jansi ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director General of Police, Director General of Police Office, Chennai, Chennai District. 2.The Deputy Inspector of Police, Deputy Inspector of Police Office, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 4.E.Joseph ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first to third respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2011 and direct the first to third respondents to take action against the fourth respondent according to law and punish him. For petitioner : Mr.C.Baskaran For respondents : Mr.T.R.Janarthanan, 1 to 3 Addl. Government Pleader ORDER The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition to direct the first and third respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2011 and to direct the first and third respondents to take action against the fourth respondent according to law and punish him. 2.Mr.T.R.Janarthanan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Considering the nature of the order that is to be passed, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 4.By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 5.The petitioner has certain grievance against the fourth respondent, who is a police constable and has given representations to the first and second respondents on 24.02.2011 and third respondent on 26.04.2010 and 24.02.2011. 6.Considering the nature of the relief sought for, the third respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.02.2011 on its own merits and in accordance with law. It is made clear that if any action is proposed against the fourth respondent, he shall be given an opportunity to refute the allegation made against him and there shall not be any violation of principle of natural justice or arbitrariness in dealing with this matter. 7.The writ petition is disposed of as above. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director General of Police, Director General of Police Office, Chennai, Chennai District. 2.The Deputy Inspector of Police, Deputy Inspector of Police Office, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District gcg rl/4c – 15.7.2011 order in W.P.(MD).No.7371 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 05.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/