Chenchali Kameswari vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2062 AP

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY


               WRIT PETITION NO.9338 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 preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus holding the action of the 4th respondent in not issuing pattadar pass book and title deed in favour of the petitioner for the lands admeasuring an extent of Ac.5.30 cents in Survey No.134/1 (old survey No.184), Ac.0.95 cents in survey No.135-1(old survey No.180-1), Ac.1.73 cents in survey No.135-2 (old survey No.180-2), Ac.0.40 cents in survey No.144-3 (old survey No.94-7). Ac.0.47 cents in survey No.145-1 (old survey No.94-

2), Ac.8.16 cents in survey No.145-2 (old survey No.94-1), Ac.3.55 cents in survey No.157(old survey No.116), Ac.0.59 cents in survey No.182-6 (old survey No.158-1), Ac.1.32 cents in survey No.183(old survey No.156-1), Ac.12.10 cents in survey No.189(old survey No.135), Ac.1.37 cents in survey No.208-1 (old survey No.242-1), Ac.13.30 cents in survey No.242-3(old survey No.242-3). Ac.5.64 cents in survey No.222-1 (old survey No.237), Ac.0.11 cents in survey No.222-2 (old survey No.237-2), Ac.0.80 cents in survey No.222-4 (old survey No.237-4), Ac.0.82 cents in survey No.222-5 (old survey No.237-

5) fallen under T.D.No.1552, situated in Thatituru village, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act and consequently direct the respondents to issue pattadar pass book and title

deed in favour of the petitioner for the above said lands."

2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against

the respondents, during hearing, the 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 of the petitioner, dated 09.04.2021.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed

to dispose of the representation of the petitioner if any, pending

with the respondents authorities.

4. In view of the submission of 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 not service to the cause of justice. As

the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to

dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated

09.04.2021, I find no other alternative except to issue such

direction.

5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the

respondent authorities to dispose of the representation of the

petitioner, dated 09.04.2021, in accordance with law, within

2019 (8) SCALE 544

four (4) weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs of

the Writ petition.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the Writ

Petition, shall also stand closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Date: 21.06.2021

MP