IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21992 of 2008(R) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.X.JAMES, S/O.XAVIER, MANAGING PARTNER, EXSERVICEMEN'S CENTRE OF ADVENTURE AND RECREATION, NEAR ATHIRAPPILLY WATERFALLS, RESIDING AT 'MINAS', NGO QUARTERS JUNCTION, THRIKKAKARA, KOCHI - 682 021. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL NCC, NCC DIRECTORATE (K & L), COTTON HILL BUNGLOW, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 10. 2. THE CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF, ARMY HEADQUARTERS, NEW DELHI - 110 011. 3. LT COL. PROMOD KUMAR, COMMANDING OFFICER, 21(K) BN, NCC, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR RPTS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.21992 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner wants to set up an Adventure Club. The 3rd respondent who is an NCC officer allegedly agreed to help the petitioner to set up the club. The petitioner alleges that he has paid some amounts to 3rd respondent for this purpose. In respect of same the respondent has not done anything or return the money. In the above circumstances the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction, call for the records leading to Ext.P6 and quash the same; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 gto take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent on the basis of Exts.P2 and P3 complaints forwarded by the petitioner to the 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.” 2. I have heard the Assistant Solicitor General also. 3. The petitioner has no case that the services of the 3rd respondent has been sought by the petitioner in the W.P(C)No.21992 of 2008 - 2 - official capacity of the 3rd respondent as NCC officer or a officer of the defense services. According to me, the same is purely a private contract between two individuals namely the petitioner and the Lt. Col. Promod Kumar. Such contract cannot be enforced through proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's remedy lies else where. Accordingly, without prejudice to the other remedies of the petitioner this writ petition is dismissed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs