- (1.) HEARD Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the Joint Commissioner, Transport, F.F.P. Building, H.E.C. , Dhurwa, Ranchi (respondent no. 4) has passed an order on 29th March, 2010 (Annexure 6) to the effect that the petitioner Dilip Kumar alias Dilip Kumar Agarwal has misbehaved with him in his office, using unparliamentary language and thereby created an atmosphere which was derogatory, due to which the Joint Commissioner, Transport was not able to conduct his normal office work in his office on the said date. He, therefore, passed an order that the three persons who were present in his office and tried to misbehave with him should not be allowed to enter in the office. This order has been challenged by the petitioner seeking to quash Office Order contained in Memo No. 442 dated 29th March, 2010 (Annexure 6) passed by the respondent no. 4, as the same has been issued in mala fide exercise of power, directing the respondents, particularly respondents no. 3 and 4, to make proper arrangement of counters for receiving the different kinds of applications, forms, payments and for supplying the certified copies, tax token etc. Though no order was passed to file counter affidavit, yet counter affidavit has been filed and rejoinder to the counter affidavit has also been filed. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that first information report has been registered against the petitioner and others. However, in the rejoinder affidavit, it has been stated that in the first information report, final report has been submitted. The issuance of writ for quashing the order which is absolutely an office order to maintain peace, law and order in the office of the respondent cannot be questioned in a writ of certiorari. The order impugned was issued only for a limited purpose to enable the officers to conduct their work in a peaceful manner. In the counter affidavit, it is further stated that the office is situated in a building, namely, F.F.P. Building, H.E.C. , Dhurwa, Ranchi where a number of other offices are situated in the same building premises. The petitioner has only been asked not to enter in the office of the Transport Commissioner. The relief prayed for in this writ petition is absolutely frivolous. Power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be allowed to be used for such trivial objections. No manifest error of law or error apparent could be pointed out by the learned counsel. In view of the reasons aforesaid, I do not think this writ petition calls for any interference and is accordingly dismissed.;