High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Raj Kumar Maurya v. D.M. And Others - WRIT - C No. 13720 of 2007  RD-AH 4430 (14 March 2007)
Hon. Anjani Kumar, J.
Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.
Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
The petitioner, by means of this petition, has prayed for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to enquire into the matter of the petitioner as contained in the representations dated 17.6.2006, 1.7.2006, 7.12.2006 and 8.12.2006 and for protecting the life and property of the petitioner and his other family members by taking action in the matter. It is stated at the Bar by the counsel for the petitioner that there is a difference between the petitioner and his wife.
Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that the respondents are under statutory obligation to decide the representations of the petitioner which may require a mandamus from this Court.
In these circumstances, we decline to issue any mandamus as prayed for by the petitioner. However, it is open for the petitioner to approach the higher authority in this regard.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.