ASHOK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved against the impugned communication dated 14.1.2013 (Annexure P -3) purportedly issued on the basis of communication dated 14.5.2012 (Annexure P -4), petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 14.5.2012 (Annexure P -4). Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto, written statement was filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, whereas a separate written statement was filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 3 and 4.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the communication dated 14.5.2012 (Annexure P -4) issued by Superintendent of Police, Sonepat -respondent No. 3 is cryptic and non -speaking. He further submits that based on that communication dated 14.5.2012 issued by respondent No. 3, no order is being passed by the competent authority, i.e. District Magistrate -cum -Deputy Commissioner, - Sonepat -respondent No. 2 without disclosing any reason. He further submits that petitioner will be satisfied, in case respondent No. 3 is directed to conduct an objective enquiry so as to submit his appropriate report to the competent authority, i.e. District Magistrate, Sonepat, within a reasonable time and thereafter respondent No. 2 may be directed to decide the matter at an early date.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, after careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the given fact situation of the present case, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed. To say so, reasons are more than one, which are being recorded hereinafter.