IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10035 of 2009(S) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ROBIN GEORGE, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, PARAYIL HOUSE RAMALLUR DESOM, KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.CHANDRAN SRI.BABY JOSEPH(B.JOSE) RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, H.O.ALWAYE RERPESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER (SARFASI ACT) THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, MARINE DRIVE,ERNAKULAM. 3. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 4. RAJENDRAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR CARE CONNECTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MAMANGALAM PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM. 5. V.S.MURUGAN, AGED 47 YEARS, AUCTION PURCHASER, S/O.V.SREENIVASAN, HARI TEX, 63 PATEL ROAD, RAM NAGAR,COIMBATORE. 6. EMTEX INTEM LTD, REGD.OFFICE AT 39/2418 P.B.NO.1816,DIWANS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 16 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DR.VARGHESE MUNDAKKAL. 7. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL) ALUVA. 8. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALM POLICE STATION. R7 & R8 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.10035 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 27th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. This writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “i) issue a writ of certiorari to call for the connected records from Respondents 1, 2 and 5 to set aside Ext.P1 sale; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondents 1, 2 and 5 to bring about a settlement in the matter in the public interest and to co- operate with the arrangements being negotiated by the petitioner for preserving and funning the 6th respondent company in the public interest; iii) issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to impose and realize penalty as stipulated in section 28 of the SARFASI Act, 2002 from respondents 1, 2 and 5 and to pay the 6th respondent company.” W.P.(C) No.10035 of 2009 2 2. Apparently the grievance is mainly on the second and third prayers. Since the petitioner has sought an issue of a writ of mandamus it is for the petitioner to first approach the authorities concerned, even assuming that the petitioner has locus standi to file this public interest litigation. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the authorities concerned. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns