IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.4566 of 2009 Between: M/s. Globus Education Society, Having its office at Plot Nos.797 and 798, Sri Swamy Ayyappa Co- operative Housing Society Ltd., Khanamet, Guttala Begumpet village, Madhapur, Hi-tech city, Cyberabad, Hyderabad, Rangareddy District reptd., by General Secretary. … Petitioner And Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, R.R.District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad and seven others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.Raja Sripathi Rao. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 to R.4. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.4 in registering case against respondents 5 to 8 in pursuance of the petitioner’s complaint, dated 2-3-2009, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought for a direction to respondent No.1 to take disciplinary action against respondent No.4 in aiding respondents 5 to 8 in their illegal activities. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.4 it is, inter alia, stated that on receipt of the complaint from the petitioner, Crime No.142 of 2009 for the offences under Sections 448 and 506 IPC was registered on 7-3- 2009 and investigation was already commenced, in which the investigation officer examined four witnesses and recorded their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further stated that investigation is pending for want of examination of some more witnesses. This stand taken in the counter-affidavit by respondent No.4 has not been controverted by the petitioner. Therefore, the first limb of the prayer in the Writ Petition does not survive for consideration. As regards the direction to take disciplinary action against respondent No.4, it is not possible for this Court to adjudicate, at this stage, whether respondent No.4 is guilty of dereliction of his duty and colluded with respondents 5 to 8. The petitioner is permitted to make appropriate application to respondent No.1 against respondents 5 to 8 along with relevant material. If such a representation is filed, respondent No.1 shall consider and take appropriate action thereon. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:15-6-2009 MNR