Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kunchala.Krushanaiah, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 1 July, 2021
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.9652 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 highhanded action of the
respondent No.3 in attempting to dispossess/ Cutting the branches
of Mango Trees Garden of Agriculture land to an extent of Ac. 1.50
cents of 1st petitioner and an extent of Ac. 0.61 cents of 2nd petitioner
in Sy.No. 232/4, out of Ac. 2.47 cents situated at Mannetikota
Village, Ulavapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, being violation of
principles of natural justice and proposing to allot the same to House
sites under Navaratnalu scheme without calling for any explanation
is contrary to the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013, besides arbitrary in violation of Article 14,
19, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the
respondent No.3 not to dispossess the petitioners from the schedule
property of Mango Trees Garden of Agriculture land to an extent of
Ac. 1.50 cents of 1st petitioner and an extent of Ac. 0.61 cents of 2nd
petitioner in Sy.No. 232/4, out of Ac. 2.47 cents situated at
Mannetikota Village, Ulavapadu Mandal, Prakasam District...."
2. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the
respondents, during the course of hearing learned counsel for the
petitioner requested this Court without touching the merits of the
case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the
representation dated 16.03.2021 submitted by the petitioner.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for
respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representation dated
16.03.2021 submitted by the petitioners, if any pending with the
respondent authorities.
4. In view of the submission of Government Pleader for Revenue
appearing for respondents, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of
the allegations made in the petition.
5. 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 not serve to the cause of
justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioners himself requested to
issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 16.03.2021
submitted by the petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue
such direction.
6. In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the
respondent authorities to dispose of representation dated 16.03.2021
submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within four (04)
weeks from today, while declaring to issue any direction on the
representation dated 16.03.2021, the respondents are directed not to
interfere with possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the
subject property. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 01.07.2021
KK
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.9652 OF 2021
Date: 01.07.2021
KK
