THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.37057 OF 2015
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"to issue an appropriate writ, direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 3rd and 5th respondents in not considering the petitioners representations dated 2.11.2015 and thereby giving possession certificate by the 5th respondent and thereby levying vacant land tax by the 3rd respondent on the petitioners properties in an extent of 300 sq.yards in Sy.No.5/3, TP.No.41/71 (42/71), Plot No.13 and to extent of 450 sq.yards in Sy.No.5/3, TP.No.41/71 (42/71), Plot No.14 Buchirajupalem village, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, malafide and against the principles of natural justice and is contrary to the procedure contemplated under law and also in violation of Constitution rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to entertain the request of the 6 th respondent without conducting any enquiry on the petitioners representations dated 02.11.2015."
Though the petitioners made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 02.11.2015.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 02.11.2015, if any pending with the authorities.
In view of the submission of the learned Assistant 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 MSM,J WP_37057_2015 2 in "The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1", 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 petitioners himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 02.11.2015, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 02.11.2015, in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from today. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 06.01.2022 Ksp 1 2019 (8) SCALE 544