Mmassociation vs Nellore Venu Gopal

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                        &
                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI


                       WRIT APPEAL No.662 of 2021

                  (Hybrid Hearing Through video conferencing)

Mutyalapeta Merchant Association, Gudur,
Gandhi Municipal Buildings, Gudur,
SPSR Nellore District rep., by its Secretary.

                                                           ..Appellant


                                      Versus

Nellore Venu Gopal, S/o late Sanjeeva Raju,
Aged 53 years, Occ: Barber, R/o D.No.5/134,
A.S. Temple Street, East Gudur village,
Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, and others.
                                                           ...Respondents

Counsel for the appellant            : Mr. C. Subodh

Counsel for respondent No.1          : Mr. G. Venkateswarlu

Counsel for respondent No.3          : Mr. N. Ranga Reddy, standing counsel.


                                  ORAL JUDGMENT
                                   Dt:25.10.2021

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

This writ appeal is preferred against an order dated 21.06.2021 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.11454 of 2021.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that while issuing directions to the 2nd respondent in the writ petition (respondent No.3 herein) to consider the representation made by the writ petitioner on 06.04.2021, the learned single Judge had not afforded any opportunity of hearing to the appellant. He would submit that considering the 2 background facts which resulted in filing of the writ petition, the appellant also deserves to be heard by the 2nd respondent in the writ petition.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant for some time, we are of the considered opinion that that ends of justice would be met if the appellant is also heard by the 2nd respondent in the writ petition at the time when the representation of the petitioner is decided by the said authority in terms of the directions issued by the learned single Judge. However, as the order passed by the learned single Judge on 21.06.2021 would direct the 2nd respondent therein to decide the representation of the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, we observe that the 2nd respondent shall hear the appellant also if the representation of the writ petitioner is yet to be decided.

4. With the above observations, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ                              A.V. SESHA SAI, J

                                                                          Nn