Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/6616/2015 of Pasumarthi Venkateswara Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by District Collector, on 31 December 2021
SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.6616 OF 2015 ORDER: This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.6616 OF 2015
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:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring inaction on the part of 3rd respondent on the petitioners representation dated 30.10.2014 submitted to correct clerical errors in respect of lands admeasuring Ac. 4.63 cents covered by Survey Numbers 430-A situated in Anumunilanka Revenue Village in Nallajarla Mandal of West Godavari District under Section 5, 6 of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act 1971 and also as per Board Standing Order 34-B of Andhra Pradesh Board of Revenue Standing Orders as illegal irregular irrational amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred under said provisions of law and offends Article 14 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to correct the clerical errors for the petitioner’s said landand pass such other order..”
2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner limited his request to dispose of representation, dated 30.10.2014 pending before respondent authorities, without touching the merits of the case.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representation, dated 30.10.2014, if any, pending with the respondent-authorities.
4. Recording the submissions made by the 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 dispose of the representation, dated 30.10.2014 pending before respondent authorities, I find no other alternative, except to issue such direction.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation, dated 30.10.2014 pending before him, in accordance with law, within four (04) weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
6. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 31.12.2021 psr
112
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.6616 OF 2015
Date: 31.12.2021
Psr.