B SATYANARAYANA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful petitioner in W.P.No.14104 of 1994 is the appellant in this appeal. He is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned single Judge disposing of the said writ petition filed by him with a direction to the respondents to review the rowdy sheet in accordance with law, taking into consideration the subsequent conduct of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. The said order is challenged on various grounds.

(2.) In order to consider the question as to whether the impugned order suffers from any legal infirmity requiring our interference, necessary facts leading to filing of this writ appeal may have to be noticed: The appellant herein invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to delete his name from the Rowdy Sheet No.25, dated 15-12-1991 duly declaring the action of the respondents as illegal and void. According to the appellant, he was falsely implicated as Accused No.1 in Crime No.45 of 1990 on the file of Pattabhipuram Law and Order Police Station, Guntur for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) That after registration of the said crime on 16-6-1990, the second respondent herein had opened the Rowdy sheet No.25, dated 15-12-1991 as against the appellant herein registering him as a rowdy sheeter. The said action of the respondents herein is challenged on the ground that the same is not in accordance with the procedure contemplated in S.O.No. 742 of the Police Standing Orders. It was contended before the learned single Judge that there is no justification on the part of the respondents in opening the rowdy sheet against the appellant herein. The action on the part of the respondents, according to the appellant, is ultra vires.