IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3281 of 2008 Between: S.K.Hussain S/o. Late Magar Saab, Muslim R/o. Peerlagudem Village, Near Kothagudem, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House officer, Hayat Nagar Police station, Cyberabad police commissionrate, Ranga reddy [ dt ]. 2 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, L.B.Nagar, Cyberabad. Ranga Reddy [ dt ]. 3 Mr.Srisailam, Hayath Nagar, P.S., Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy [ dt ] 4 Mr.Guduru Malla reddy, S/o. Rama Swamy Reddy, Hindu R/o. H.No. 3-63, uppal Depot, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order, direction, more Particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction to the respondent 17 2 to consider the representations dt 15-12-2007 filed by the Petitioner for take disciplinary action against the Respondent No.3 and take Criminal action against the Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SARAVANA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus to the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action on the representation dated 15th December, 2007 filed by him8 for taking disciplinary action against the third respondent-Head Constable of the Hayathnagar Police Station, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. On 15th December, 2007, the petitioner filed a representation before the second respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Police alleging interference by the third respondent in civil disputes, which are pending between him and the fourth respondent. In the representation, it is stated that there is a demand from the fourth respondent for return of money alleged to have been advanced to the petitioner and the third respondent is illegally assisting the fourth respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has yet been initiated pursuant to his representation. Except the representation of the petitioner and his own statement in this regard, there is no other material available on record to substantiate the same. In any event, when the alleged interference by the third respondent in civil disputes is brought to the notice of his employer i.e., the second respondent, it is for the second respondent to decide whether to take any disciplinary action or not. Merely by making a representation to the employer of third respondent, the petitioner cannot seek direction by way of Mandamus to take disciplinary action against the third respondent, as the Writ Petition is silent as to the nature of the petitioner’s legal rights being infringed. In that view of the matter, I do not find any substance in the Writ Petition and the same is devoid of merits. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. __________________ (R.Subhash Reddy, J) 19th February, 2008 lur ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Station House officer, Hayat Nagar Police station, Cyberabad police commissionrate, Ranga reddy [ dt ]. 2 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, L.B.Nagar, Cyberabad. Ranga Reddy [ dt ]. 3.2CCs to the G.P. for Home 4.2CD copies