Crl. Misc. No. M-10456 of 2011 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-10456 of 2011 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 26.04.2011 Tehal Singh ..........Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ..........Respondents BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. Crl. Misc. No. 19250 of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. M-10456 of 2011 The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Tehal Singh for issuing directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to decide the complaint/representation dated 30.10.2010 and to take appropriate action against respondents No.4 and 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing Crl. Misc. No. M- 21271 of 2010, which was dismissed on 26.7.2010. However, it was mentioned in the order that the petitioner can approach the higher officers of the Income Tax Department for redressal of his grievance. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner has approached the Income Tax Department and filed a detailed representation but no action has been taken. Learned counsel also submits that respondents No.4 and 5 have Crl. Misc. No. M-10456 of 2011 (O&M) (2) not disclosed the source of income and they are having disproportionate assets more than their declared income. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the documents available on the record. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents No.4 and 5 are having income disproportionate to their sources and inspite of filing complaint to the Income Tax Department, no action has been taken. Earlier also, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing Crl. Misc. No. M-21171 of 2010, which was dismissed vide order dated 26.7.2010 by observing that no direction can be issued. However, it was mentioned in the order that the petitioner can approach the higher officers of the Income Tax Department for his grievance and accordingly the petitioner has already approached the Income Department. Now it is for the Income Tax Department to take any action on the same or not. The petitioner has no cause of action in the present case for issuance of any direction to the Income Tax Department. Admittedly the petitioner and respondents No.4 and 5 have some dispute with regard to amount and the present petition seems to be filed because of that grouse only. There is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed accordingly. April 26, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No