Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Nallamilli Kasi Viswanath Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 August, 2021
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.15188 OF 2021
ORDER:
This writ 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 the inaction of the 3rd
respondent in considering the ROR.appeal No. /2007 dated
04.10.2008 under Section 5-B of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land
and Pattadar Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 in respect of
issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds in the name of the
9th to 12th respondents without reference of the petitioners by 4th
respondent in pursuant to the Rythwari Patta for total extent of
24.81 Hectors(approximately Ac.61-27 cents) covered by
Sy.Nos.50, 73, 75 and 112 situated at K.Yerrampalem Village,
Rampachodavaram Mandal, East Godavari District in favour of
the petitioners as per the case file No.1392/80, dated 31.10.1980
by the Settlement Officer, Anakapalli despite issuance of notice
Ref.G.955/2008, dated 03.01.2009 on 03.02.2009, RTI
application dated 08.04.2018, representation dated 26.07.2020,
further notices Ref.E/180/2017 dated 12.10.2020, 27.03.2021
and 10.06.2021 as not conducting enquiry in the matter except
issuance of notices time to time is arbitrary, illegal and void and
violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and
Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 and Rules 1989 and Regulations
apartfom violative of Article 14, 21, 300-A and 350 of Constitution
of India"
2. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the
respondents, during hearing, Sri Rama Murthy P.V.S.A, learned
counsel for the petitioners limited his request to dispose of appeal
pending before the 3rd respondent/Sub-Collector,
Rampachodavaram, without touching the merits of the case.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the
respondents readily agreed to dispose of the appeal, 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.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
appeal pending before the 3rd respondent/ Sub-Collector,
Rampachodavaram, I find no other alternative, except to issue such
direction.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the
3rd respondent/ Sub-Collector, Rampachodavaram to dispose of the
appeal pending before him, in accordance with law, within Eight(8)
weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this order after giving
opportunity to all the concerned. No costs.
As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
__________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 03.08.2021
tm
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.15188 OF 2021
Date: 03.08.2021
tm
