Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Smt. Surapaneni Sarojanamma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 July, 2021
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.12969 OF 2018
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking the following relief:-
"......to issue a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in
not considering the representations of petitioner, dated 13.11.2017,
28.09.2017 and 18.03.2016 to all the respondents in paying compensation
to the 6th respondent, who produced Chupudu Adumanam and registered
settlement instead of petitioner, who is real owner and possessor in respect
of their land in an extent of Ac.0.60 cents in Sy.No.234-3 and an extent of
Ac.0.40 cents in Sy.No.238-1 situated in Damavaram Village, Dagadarthi
Mandal, SPSR Nellore District for Airport without issuing notice or
conducting enquiry is discriminatory, illegal, irregular, arbitrary, against
the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14 and 21 of
Indian Constitution of India and consequently direct all the respondents to
consider the representations of the petitioner dated 13.11.2017, 28.09.2017
and 18.03.2016 and to pay compensation in respect of the petitioners' land
in an extent of Ac.0.60 cents in Sy.No.234-3 and an extent of Ac.0.40 cents
in Sy.No.238-1 situated in Damavaram village, Dagadarthi Mandal,
SPSR Nellore District and pass such other order..."
2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the
respondents, during hearing, Sri N.Anula, learned counsel for
petitioner limited his request to dispose of the representations, dated
13.11.2017, 28.09.2017 and 18.03.2016 submitted by the
petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing
for the respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representations
submitted by the petitioner, if any, pending with the respondent-
authorities.
4. In view of the learned Government Pleader for Land
Acquisition, 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
petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to the respondent
authorities request to dispose of the representations dated
13.11.2017, 28.09.2017 and 18.03.2016 submitted by the
petitioner, I find no other alternative, except to issue such direction.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the
respondent authorities request to dispose of the representations
dated 13.11.2017, 28.09.2017 and 18.03.2016 submitted by the
petitioner, in accordance with law, within four (04) weeks from today.
No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
__________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 26.07.2021
IS
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.12969 OF 2018
Date: 26.07.2021
IS
