K R RAMASWAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 29.1.2018 of the petitioner and to take action against the officials mentioned in the petitioner's representation, who were allegedly involved in "illegal activities and negligence to discharge their duty".

(2.) From the representation annexed to the typed set of papers, it appears that the President of India, the Governor of Tamil Nadu, the Chief Justice of India (referred to as Chief Judge), the Chief Justice of this High Court (referred to as Chief Judge), the Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary have been requested to take serious action against the officials, who have allowed erection of banners along the road from the DGP office in Rajaji Salai to Anna Circle on Mount Road. We are informed that all the banners have been removed and no banners are there.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that criminal action should be taken. The writ petition is, however, devoid of any material particulars. In a writ petition, the onus is on the petitioner to establish his entitlement to the reliefs claimed. Learned counsel has not referred to any provision under which criminal action can be taken for setting up of posters containing pictures of politicians. There are also no details at all with regard to the alleged violation of rules in putting up of banners. The persons allegedly guilty of dereliction of duty or connivance have not been named. Such vague writ petitions cannot be entertained. The Court has serious matters to deal with. Such vague and frivolous writ petitions which consume the Court's time should be discouraged with exemplary costs. It is warned that in future exemplary costs shall be imposed for frivolous so called public interest litigations, which do not concern the public at large.