Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents to action security complaints written to the President and PM. Court denied relief, holding no statute mandates President/PM to adjudicate such complaints. Petition dismissed.
None. Petition dismissed with liberty to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate forum.
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.
$~36
RAKESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms Vipra Bhardwaj, Advocate for R-1 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R
% 21.11.2017
under:-
and there is no statute which requires the Prime Minister or the President to adjudicate the complaints or to act in a particular manner. The request made by the petitioner would obviously have to be referred to the concerned authorities; which has been done in this case.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
NOVEMBER 21, 2017 RK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can direct the President and Prime Minister to adjudicate the security complaints of the petitioner.
Whether there is a statutory requirement for the President or Prime Minister to act on the petitioner's complaints.
RAKESH KUMAR
UNION OF INDIA
VIBHU BAKHRU
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
