1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.222/2010 Girish S/o Ganesh Dhunde Age 23 years, Occ-Education R/o Vyankatesh Plaza, Flat No.A/3 Eknath Nagar Road, Osmanpura Aurangabad .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1] The Union of India [Through the Secretary, Defence Ministry, New Delhi] 2] The Director General National Cadet Corps Garrison Parade Ground New Delhi. 3] The Deputy Director General National Cadet Corps Maharashtra, Colaba Mumbai. 4] The Commanding Officer 51, Mahashtra Battalion National Cadet Corps Opp.Govt.Engineering College Eknath Nagar Road, Osmanpura, Aurangabad. 5] National Cadet Corps (NCC) Care taker Vivekanand Arts Sardar 2 Dalipsingh Commerce & Science College, Samarth Nagar Aurangabad, through its caretaker Mr.R.B.Shejul. [Respondents be served through Ld Standing Counsel for UOI, High Court Bench at Aurangabad] .. RESPONDENTS .... Smt.Ujjawal Agrawal,Advocate for petitioner Shri Alok Sharma Standing Counsel for Respondents no.1 to 4. Respondent No.5 served. .... CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH,C.J. AND P.V.HARDAS,J. DATE : 27TH AUGUST 2010. PER COURT: 1] By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents i.e. Defence Ministry, New Delhi, the Director General, National Cadet Corps, New Delhi and other officers of the National Cadet Corps, to initiate detail enquiry with regard to letter dated 4th January 2010 at Exhibit “D”. 2] The respondents are inquiring as to how the petitioner received letter dated 4th January 2010 under Exhibit “D”, inviting the petitioner for the Republic Day Parade at New Delhi on 26th January 2010, though no such letter was issued by the respondent no.2, but which is purported to have been signed 3 and sent by respondent no.2 the Director General, National Cadet Corps, New Delhi. 3] The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is being harassed in connection with the authenticity and authorization of the said letter, though the petitioner is not at fault and has received the said letter from respondent no.4 at Aurangabad. 4] The learned counsel for respondents submits that no harassment is being caused to the petitioner but only enquiry is being made as to who had issued the letter in question and how the petitioner received the same. 5] In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner has any grievance against any action on the part of the respondents, it is open for the petitioner to pursue other remedies available under the law. Petition is disposed of in terms of the above reasons. [CHIEF JUSTICE] [P.V.HARDAS,J.] umg/criwp615-10