The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate had already directed the SHO to examine the matter and take action, thus no further direction was warranted. The petition is disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22641 of 2018
Petitioner :- Hari Shankar Prasad Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharm Narayan Mishra, Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
This writ petition has been filed interalia for the following relief:-
(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 5- the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Soraon, District Allahabad to decide the representation dated 08.07.2017 submitted by the petitioner (Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition).
Perusal of the representation dated 08.07.2018 (Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition) indicates that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Soraon, District Allahabad vide its order dated 08.07.2018 had directed the Station House Officer (SHO), Nawabganj, Allahabad to examine the matter and to take appropriate action against the erring persons.
In view of the above, we do not see any justification to issue any further direction in the matter. However, it is expected that the concerned Station House Officer (S.H.O) in pursuance of the order dated 08.07.2018 passed by the SubDivisional Magistrate, Soraon, Allahabad will take appropriate action in the matter without any interference and without any fear.
With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 11.7.2018 Arun
Hari Shankar Prasad
State Of U P
Shashi Kant Gupta
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
