SHANTANU MANDAL Vs. ARUN KUMAR AGARWAL
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARUN KUMAR AGARWAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying inter
alia for directions to initiate appropriate action against the respondents under
the provisions of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities
Act), 1989 (in short 'the Act') as also for issuance of a writ of prohibition
prohibiting the respondents from taking any action against the petitioner
amounting to harassment. Lastly, the petitioner had prayed for directions to
respondents to produce the records to determine the accountability of the
respondents in harassing the petitioner.
(2.) The prayers made in the amended writ petition read as under:-
"(a) to issue a writ of mandamus or writ of certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing for the appropriate
action under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribunals
(Prevention of Atrocities), Act 1989.
(b) issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents, their
servants and agents in taking any action against the petitioner amounting to
(d) to issue directions for calling the records for determining the
accountability of concerned respondents in harassing the petitioner.
(e) to allow the writ petition with costs.
(f) to pass such other and further order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."
(3.) The main grievance of the petitioner is against respondents No.1
and 2. He submits that respondents No. 4 to 6 have been impleaded in the
present writ petition as the Government of India is the cadre controlling
authority of the petitioner and as the petitioner is posted with the hospitals
of NCT of Delhi, respondent No. 3, the latter has also been impleaded.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.