Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/34920/2014 of GUMMA PAPA RAO, GUNTUR DIST Vs SECY, REVENUE DEPT, HYDERABAD AND 3 OTHERS on 30 December 2022
V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.34920 of 2014 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.34920 of 2014
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:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents in not taking any action for issuing regularization orders in respect of the petitioner’s house plot admeasuring 75 Sq.Yds, in T.S.No.773/1 and 781/9, Ward No 9, Block No 11 situated at Sangadigunta, Guntur Mandal, Guntur District, even after receiving the requisite regularization charges of Rs.41,250/- paid on 17.01.2014 pursuant to the notice dt.17.01.2014 issued by the 4[th]respondent bearing Rc.No.107/2012-D, inspite of repeated visits followed by written representation dt:31.01.2014, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to issue the regularization orders in favour of the petitioner and to grant and pass such other orders”.
2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner limited his request to direct the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation dated 31.01.2014submitted by the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.
3. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to take appropriate action on the representation dated 31.01.2014,submitted by the petitioner, if any, pending with the respondent-authorities.
4. In view of the submission of learned Government Pleader for Revenue, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v.
P.Venkatesh[1]”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 31.01.2014 , I find no other alternative, except to issue such direction.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 4[th] respondent to dispose of the representation dated 31.01.2014, submitted by the petitioner, if any pending with them, in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_______________________
JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
Date : 30.12.2022 KGR/SSN
134
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.34920 of 2014
Date : 30.12.2022
KGR/SSN