T MUTHU GANESH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's complaint dated 04.07.2011 and thereby take suitable action against the respondents 3 and 4 in accordance with law. 2 THE petitioner has also filed representation with Human Rights Commission and without waiting for action taken thereon, filed another representation with the respondent No.1. 3 THE allegation levelled against the respondents No.2 to 4 show commission of criminal offence. 4 THE remedy of the petitioner therefore is to lodge F.I.R. with competent authority, and on failure, to approach criminal Court in accordance with law. 5 Once the specific statutory remedy to address grievance is available, the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the extraordinary equitable jurisdiction of this Court seeking direction to respondent No.1 to take action, as action is not for departmental proceedings but for the criminal offence, said to have been committed by the respondents No.2 to 5. 6 Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as not competent. No cost.