- (1.) THE present petition has been preferred mainly against the private respondent i.e. respondent No.4. The petitioners allege that a writ of mandamus may be issued against respondent No. 4 for non -consideration of the petitioners for compassionate appointment. Counsel for the petitioners is unable to explain before this Court whether respondent No. 4 is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and who is managing the affairs of respondent No. 4 and whether respondent No. 4 is a Government company or not. Thus, petitioner could not point out that respondent No.4 is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) IN view of these facts, I am not inclined to issue a writ of mandamus upon respondent NO.4. Other remedies are available with the petitioners, if the petitioners are aggrieved, they can move be", fore the appropriate forum or court. There is no substance in this writ petition. Hence, the 'same is hereby dismissed.;