G VIDYASAGAR RAO Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR NALGONDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A writ of certiorari is sought to quash the order dated 7. 11. 1997, and the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent, (R. D. O, Nalgonda), in Crime no. 106 of 1997. The 1st respondent is the district Collector, Nalgonda, and the 3rd respondent is the Station House Officer, chintapalli P. S. Nalgonda District. The writ petition was dismissed for default, as against respondents 2 and 3, by order of this court dated 6. 9. 2000. As such the second part of the prayer in the writ petition, to quash the complaint made by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent in Crime no. 106 of 1997, cannot be granted.

(2.) IT is necessary to note that, even in the first limb of the prayer, the order dated 10. 9. 1997 is struck off by pen and in its place the order dated '7. 11. 1997' is written in hand, presumably by the Counsel for the petitioner. The proceedings dated 7. 11. 1997 is the complaint made by the R. D. O, nalgonda to the S. H. O, Chintapalli Police station marking a copy thereof to the superintendent of Police, the District collector and the M. R. O. , Chintapalli. Since the proceedings dated 7. 11. 1997 has alone been questioned in the writ petition on the erroneous premise that it had been passed by the 1st respondent, when, in fact, it emanated from the 2nd respondent, the said proceedings dated 7. 11. 1997 cannot also be interfered with since the writ petition has already been dismissed for default as against the 2nd respondent.

(3.) EVEN if the proceedings dated 10. 9. 1997, which has been struck off, is presumed to be the order under challenge, a copy thereof has not even been filed and this Court is not made aware of its contents. All that can be gathered from the proceedings dated 7. 11. 1997 is that the District Collector, nalgonda, vide letter dated 10. 9. 1997, had informed that the petitioner, before his appointment as Village Officer in the year 1982-83, had managed to tamper with the village records for the years 1962-63 till 1974-75 of Thakkallapalli Village and, as a result, he was declared a non-surplus holder in C. C. No. 5343/75/dvk on deletion of acs. 91-91 cents of land. The 1st respondent district Collector directed a complaint to be lodged against the petitioner for offences under Sections 193, 199 and 200 I. P. C. It is on the basis of this letter dated 10. 9. 1997 that the 2nd respondent R. D. O. had addressed letter dated 7. 11. 1997 to the 3rd respondent S. H. O. who, in turn, had registered the complaint as Crime No. 106 of 1997.