1. The petitioner is questioning the endorsement issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. The matter arises in the following manner:

The petitioner claims that for over a period of time he was working as a parcel booking agent, through ABC Parcel Service and other organizations in the Bangalore City Railway Station. According to him, respondents 7, 8 and 9 are working as Constables in the Government Railway Police Station. It is his claim that they have been regularly harassing him and demanding bribe of Rs.25,000/- per month. In this connection, the petitioner, it appears, on several occasions requested the respondent No.6, being the Controlling Officer, to rein in the respondents 7 to 9. it is his case that respondents 6 to 9 have also amassed wealth, which is disproportionate to their known source of income. Hence, the petitioner lodges a complaint with the first respondent regarding the alleged misappropriation of wealth disproportionate to their known source of income. The matter was inquired into by respondent No.2 and a note is put up indicating that respondents 6 to 9 are not amenable to the jurisdiction of Karnataka Lokayukta, inasmuch as, they are the employees o