JHUMMAN LAL DEWANGAN Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that respondent No.4 is not taking a decision on memo dtd. 3/6/2016 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent No.2. Therefore, appropriate writ be issued directing the respondents to act upon the said memo.

(2.) By memo dtd. 3/6/2016, respondent No.2 has directed respondent No.4 to do the needful to comply with the order dtd. 1/7/2010, 6/12/2010 and 9/9/2011 passed by this Court. This memo is dtd. 3/6/2016 and the petitioner has not made any representation thereafter to respondent No.4 and straightway filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and submitted that despite order issued by this Court, respondent No.4 is not acting upon to instructions issued by respondent No.2.

(3.) It is well settled law that in order to issue a writ of mandamus, the petitioner himself has a clear demand as to enforcement of legal right to the officer having requisite authority to perform the said demand and further more the authority against whom mandamus is sought must have rejected the earlier demand, therefore, a demand and its subsequent refusal are necessary to satisfy the Court that the opposite party is determined to ignore the demand of the petitioner with respect to the enforcement of his legal right. This aspect has been considered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. and others Vs. Union of India1 (1974) 2 SCC 630. Relevant para states as under:-