IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.11743 of 2011 BETWEEN Jennareddy Mahender Reddy.
... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Warangal and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. D.Y.N.L.N. CHARYULU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioner claims that he is aggrieved by the official action of the fourth respondent and seeks a Mandamus alleging that respondents 1 to 3 are not taking any disciplinary action against the fourth respondent. Petitioner also sought that a survey be conducted with regard to land in Sy.No.274 of Shanigapuram village and fix boundaries.
2. So far as the main relief requiring respondents 1 to 3 to take disciplinary action against the fourth respondent is concerned, in my view, the relief is completely misconceived. The disciplinary action is a matter for satisfaction of the employer and a third person like the petitioner cannot compel the employer i.e. respondents 1 to 3 to take disciplinary action against the fourth respondent, their employee. Mandamus sought for, therefore, is clearly misconceived and as such, I see no reason to entertain the writ petition.
3. So far as the request of the petitioner for conducting survey aforesaid is concerned, the petitioner is free to take appropriate proceedings in that regard by making application in the requisite proforma in accordance with the Rules to the competent authority.
The writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J June 12, 2014 DSK