IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NOs.12592-12594/2017 (GM - POLICE) BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. N.NAGARAJA REDDY S/O LATE NARASA REDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS 2. SMT. B.GOVINDAMMA W/O NAGARAJA REDDY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 3. SHRI.N.VASUDEV BABU S/O NAGARAJA REDDY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.540, 1ST FLOOR, 16TH ‘A’ CROSS 3RD MAIN, 6TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT BENGALURU – 560 102 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.PRAKASH T.HEBBAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SOUTH – EAST DIVISION KORAMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095 4. SHRI.M.MUNIRAJU S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 5. SMT. MANJULA W/O M.MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5 ARE R/AT NO.8, ‘A’ BLOCK GUNDUTHOPU TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD BENGALURU – 560 029 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.A.M. SURESH REDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO 3;
NOTICE TO R4 AND R5 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 24.10.2017) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R-2 AND 3 TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONERS AT ANNEXURE – G AGAINST THE ILLEGAL AND HIGH HANDED ACTS OF R-4 AND 5.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.1 to 3 and file memo of appearance within four weeks.
2. Notice to respondents No.4 and 5 is not necessary in the nature of disposal of this petition.
3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to direct respondents No.2 and 3 to take appropriate action on the representation as at Annexure-‘G’, against the illegal and high handed acts of respondents No.4 and 5, who do not have right with regard to the plaint schedule property but have been indulging in illegal acts. It is contended in that regard the Assistant Commissioner of police Shri *Lakshminarayan has been acting at their behest and has been interfering with the right of the petitioners. It is, in that light, since no action had been taken, the petitioner had * Corrected vide Court order dated 30-11-2017 filed a representation as at Annexure-‘G’ to the respondents No. 2 and 3, who are the superior police authorities of the Assistant Commissioner of police, against whom the petitioners have grievance. In so far as that aspect of the matter, if the petitioners have any grievance with regard to the manner in which the said Assistant Commissioner of police has been dealing with the matter and if it is in excess of the power available in law, the petitioners have the remedy of filing a complaint to the Police Complaints Authority as provided under Section 20(c) of the Karnataka Police Act 1963. In that view of the matter, a direction to consider the representation herein would not arise.
Further the grievance of the petitioners with regard to the acts indulged by respondents No.4 and 5, if any specific instances are referred to and a complaint in accordance with law is filed with the jurisdictional police, they would take note of the same in accordance with law. Hence, with such liberty to the petitioners herein to avail their appropriate remedies in accordance with law, these petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg