Judgment ( 1. ) BY filing this writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners claim for following reliefs : "1. It is therefore prayed that the above respondents particularly SEBI may kindly be directed to stop immediately all the public as well as rights issues to whom the SEBI has given permission and are coming in the market in the month of January. 1993, and onwards and the SEBI which is a legal body created by law be directed to compute the premium which may not be more than the face value of the share or whatsoever the reasonable amount calculated by the Government agency which may be less than the face value. ( 2. ) THE method of computing premium must be legalised and the basis of computation of premium must be given in the abridged prospectus published along with application forms. ( 3. ) THE powers given to the manager to the issue of calculation of premium immediately be withdrawn. ( 4. ) THE companies should be directed by the SEBI to disclose the manner in which the premium be utilized. ( 5. ) THAT none of the companies should be allowed to utilize the premium other than the purpose for which it is allowed to be collected as provided under Section 78 of the Companies Act, and that money is the shareholders money which should not be utilized by the management for other purposes, ( 6. ) THE MRTPC may kindly be directed to restrict all the companies coming with premium more than face value of shares and necessary investigation be made. ( 7. ) THE investors and the shareholders which are actually facing a threat, from the existing companies coming with the exorbitant premium not to participate in the rights issue be directed only to charge premium to the extent of face value of the share. ( 8. ) RESPONDENTS Nos. 1 and 2 be directed to take immediate action and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be directed not to approve such rights issue which are coming with a premium more than the face value. ( 9. ( 8. ) RESPONDENTS Nos. 1 and 2 be directed to take immediate action and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be directed not to approve such rights issue which are coming with a premium more than the face value. ( 9. ) IT is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to allow this petition and be pleased to issue a suitable writ, certiorari, mandamus order/ direction in the nature of writ or to pass such order as this Honble Court may deem fit or just in the circumstances of this case. " None for the petitioners. Heard Mr. S. C. Bagadia, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. B. C. Neema, learned Counsel, for respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Having perused the petition and the relief claimed, which are reproduced supra, I find no merit in the writ. It seems to be in the nature of public interest litigation. This Court cannot in its writ jurisdiction issue such type of general directions to respective bodies of Government of India who are regulating the sale, purchase of shares of public limited companies. Such matters are essentially policy matters which lie exclusively within the domain of the Government. This Court can only examine a particular action complained of in a particular transaction if a case to that effect is made out and if it falls within the four corners of this Court of writ jurisdiction. In other words, if a particular action of the respondent is complained then depending upon the case made out, this Court may take upon itself the task of examination of the issue but not in general form as is sought by the petitioner. The aforesaid discussion is sufficient for the dismissal of this petition. No costs. Security amount, if deposited by the petitioners, be refunded.