AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sri.Aravind Reddy.H., counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Yogesh D.Naik, Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri.Prasanna.V.R., counsel for respondent No.4 appeared in person.
This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
(i)Issue a writ or order in the nature of mandamus and direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner vide Annexure-F dated 10.01.2020 and Annexures-G and H dated 14.02.2020.
(ii)Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to pass in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.
Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions.
Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care.
Upon perusal of the representation, it is evident that the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the representation and initiate appropriate action against the alleged culprits. However, the representation is vague and bereft of specific particulars or material details that would warrant consideration and further action by the authorities. In the absence of such particulars, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
Because of dismissal of the Writ Petition, interim order granted if any stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of.