Satya Brata Sinha, J. - (1.) In this application the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the police authorities to conduct enquiry pursuant to the order passed in M. P. Case No. 890/94 by the learned Executive Magistrate, Alipore as also for a direction upon the respondents to protect the life and property of the petitioner. The petitioner is a co-sharer who is allegedly the owner of 1.76 acres of land. The property of the petitioner in question is a tank wherein he has been rearing fish for a long time. The petitioner's grievance appeared to be that respondents no. 6 to 8 are disturbing his possession and forcibly catching fishes from the tank of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner filed an application under section 144, Cr. P. C. and the learned Executive Magistrate, Alipore surprisingly on the body of the said application itself passed the following order : "O.C.P.S. is further directed to see that no wrongful act is done by O.Ps at the scheduled property during catching of fish by F. P. provided he is in possession there." The learned Counsel submits that despite the said order no action has yet been taken by the police authorities. It has been contended that the respondent nos. 6 to 8 are turbulent and influential persons. From a bare perusal of the purported order of the learned Executive Magistrate it clearly appears that the said order does not conform to the provisions of subsection (2) of section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said order is illegal and thus issuing of any writ or direction upon the police authorities to comply with the said order does not arise. Moreover, if the officer in charge of the concerned police station has not been entertaining the complain of the petitioner, in my opinion, the petitioner may approach the Superintendent of Police who may consider the grievances of the petitioner and give suitable direction to him after making an enquiry in this regard. Moreover, if there still exists any apprehension of breach of peace, it is open to the petitioner to file I'resh application before the Executive Magistrate who may pass appropriate order, if any emergency exists in exercise of his jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of sec. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure upon complying with the requirements thereof. The petitioner, in my opinion, shall be also at liberty to take such other step or steps as may be available to him in law. For the reasons aforementioned, in my opinion, it is not a case in which this Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the constitution of India inasmuch as indicated hereinbefore the petitioner can avail his alternative remedies available to him which are also efficacious.
(2.) This application is dismissed for the reasons indicated above. Writ Petition is dismissed.;