Telangana High Court
WP/24735/2004 of Toom Venkataiah, Vs The District Collector, on 30 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.24735 of 2004 Between: 1. Toom Venkataiah, S/o Bheemaiah, Ex-Kavalkar. 2. Magir
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO.24735 of 2004
Between:
1. Toom Venkataiah, S/o Bheemaiah, Ex-Kavalkar.
2. Magir Chinnaiah, S/o Mallappa, Ex-Kavalkar.
3. Tandra Verappa, S/o Yellappa, Ex-Kavalkar.
4. Bakaram Nagamani, W/o B. Sailu, Ex-Kavalkar.
5. Peddemul Kashappa, S/o Narsaiah, Ex-Kavalkar.
6. Naokoti Laxmamma, W/o Ananthaiah, Ex-Kavalkar.
All are residents of Kodangal Village and Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
..... PETITIONERS
AND
1. The District Collector, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Mahabubnagar.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar Dist.
4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodangal, Mahabubnagar District.
5. Toom Narsaiah, S/o Buggappa, resident of Kodangal village and Mandal,Mahabubnagar District.Mahabubnagar District.
6. Mangeri Sayanna, S/o Pedda Mallaiah, resident of Kodangal village andMandal, Mahabubnagar District.Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
7. Tandra Chinna Yellappa (Died) as per L.R T. Ramulu, S/o ChinnaYellappa, resident of Kodangal village and Mandal, MahabubnagarDistrict.Yellappa, resident of Kodangal village and Mandal, MahabubnagarDistrict.
8. Bakaram Mogulappa, S/o Basappa, resident ofKodangal village andMandal, Mahabubnagar District.Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
9. Peddamul Chandraiah, S/o Pakerappa, resident of Burkapuram, H/oKodangal village and Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.Kodangal village and Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
10. Naikoti Ramaiah,S/o Anthappa, resident of Kodangal village and Mandal,Mahabubnagar District.Mahabubnagar District.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature ofWrit of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein in notdisposing of the representations of the petitioners dated 25.08.2004 to consider thecase of the petitioners for appointment of village servants of Kodangal village andMandal, Mahabubnagar District on Votabandhi system as per the memoNo.91911/VO/I/92-5, dated 23.1.1996 issued by the Secretary to the Government ofAndhra Pradesh as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently directthe respondent Nos.1 to 4 to consider and dispose of the representation ofpetitioners dated 25.08.2004.
Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.N.VASUDEVA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 to 10: ---- The Court, at the admission stage, made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Questioning the inaction of the respondents 1 to 4 in considering the representationof the petitioners dated 25.08.2004 for appointment as Village Servants of KodangalVillage and Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District on Votabandhi System as per theGovernment Memo No.91911/VO/1/92-5, dated 23.01.1996, the present writ petitionis filed.
The petitioners stated to have appointed as Village Servants of Kodangal Villageand Mandal, Mahabubnagar District on Votabandhi system by the 4[th] respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer on 05.11.1996. It is stated that challenging the saidappointment order, the respondents 5 to 10 herein filed Writ Petition No.1063 of 1997, which was disposed of directingthem to prefer statutory appeal to the 3[rd] respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer andaccordingly the respondents 5 to 10 filed Appeal before the 3[rd] respondent. That the3[rd] respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer allowed the said appeal on 16.09.2000and set aside the orders of the 4[th] respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer dated05.11.1996 on the ground that there was no consent from the respondents 5 to 10. It
is further stated that as against the said orders of the 3[rd] respondent, the petitionerspreferred second appeal before the 2[nd] respondent-District Revenue Officer, and the2[nd] respondent-District Revenue Officer allowed the said appeal vide order dated28.12.2000 by setting aside the order of the 3[rd] respondent-Revenue DivisionalOfficer dated 16.09.2000 and the orders of the 4[th] respondent-Mandal RevenueOfficer dated 05.11.1996 and directed the 3[rd] respondent-Revenue Divisional Officerto take action soon after the orders issued by this Court in W.P.No.11593 of 1996.The petitioners allege that the 2[nd] respondent instead of deciding the matter onmerits directed the 3[rd] respondent to pass orders after disposal of Writ PetitionNo.11593 of 1996, and that there is no such writ petition is pending before this Courton the date of disposal of the second appeal by the 2[nd] respondent-District RevenueOfficer. The grievance of the petitioners is that subsequent to disposal of secondappeal, they made representation dated 25.08.2004 to the 4[th] respondent-MandalRevenue Officer to consider their case for appointment as Village Servants onVotabandhi system, but no action has been taken so far. Hence, the writ petition.
Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and learned Government Pleader forRevenue. At their request the writ petition is taken up for final hearing at theadmission stage itself.
Since the representation of the petitioners dated 25.08.2004 is said to be pendingconsideration before the 4[th] respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, without going intothe merits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with adirection to the 4[th] respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer to consider the same andpass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of fourmonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Nocosts.
________________
(N.V. RAMANA, J)
..... REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
SECTION OFFICER
To
1. The District Collector, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Mahabubnagar.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar Dist.
4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodangal, Mahabubnagar District.
5. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of AP, Hyderabad (OUT)
6. Two CD copies.