JUDGMENT Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J. The petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking the following reliefs: "a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties to take action against the actual Muslim culprits who are interfering in peaceful worship in temple, in the interest of justice. b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite parties to playing of the loudspeaker of temple during worship and Aarti/Ramayan/Sundarkant, Sanskar, in the interest of justice." 2. We will deal with each of the reliefs sought, seriatum. As regards prayer (a), the petition does not contain even prima facie any material to suggest or establish culpability of any member of the community so as to warrant the interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Unfortunately, the petition has been drafted without a sense of responsibility and attempts to tarnish an entire community on the basis of wholly unsubstantiated allegations. In a petition of this nature, we are firmly of the view that the Court should not exercise its jurisdiction or even issue a direction for the disposal of a representation, since the petitioner has, without placing any material on record whatsoever, moved the Court on the basis of such a vague and unsubstantiated plea. 3. Insofar as prayer (b) is concerned, the petitioner has not been able to establish either a fundamental or statutory right to indicate that the use of a loudspeaker is part of an essential religious practice. These are matters pertaining to the maintenance of law, order and tranquility in a locality which fall within the domain of the District Magistrate and the competent law and order machinery. The issuance of any direction, as sought, by this Court is clearly not warranted. 4. For these reasons, we decline to entertain the petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.