Rahmathullah Vs. State Rep By The Home Secretary, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment |
| Chennai Madurai High Court |
| Mar-09-2016 |
| W.P.(MD) No. 4727 of 2016 |
| P.N. Prakash |
| Rahmathullah |
| State Rep By The Home Secretary, Chennai and Others |
(prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the respondent nos.5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015.) 1. this writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondent nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the respondent nos.5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015. 2. when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned additional government pleader submitted that the petitioner is a history sheeted rowdy in h.s.no.564 of 2008. that apart, a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the respondents 5 and 6, who are government officials. hence, this court finds no reasons to entertain this writ petition, directing the respondent nos.1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 28.10.2015 given by the petitioner. this writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed.no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the respondent Nos.5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015.)
1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the respondent Nos.5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner is a history sheeted rowdy in H.S.No.564 of 2008. That apart, a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the respondents 5 and 6, who are Government Officials. Hence, this Court finds no reasons to entertain this writ petition, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 28.10.2015 given by the petitioner. This Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed.No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.