Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bitra Yogamma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 June, 2021
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.12112 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 action of 4th respondent
in not deciding petitioner's applications dated 29-05-2019,
03-10-2019 and 01-04-2020, submitted through Mee-seva for
rectification of online entries in 1-B (ROR) and Adangal Pahani
connected to her agricultural land of Ac.4-41 cents in Sy.No.355
of Thokapalli Revenue Village in Peddaraveedu Mandal of
Prakasam District and for granting e-pattadar passbook and title
deed in conformity thereof, as illegal, irregular, irrational and
amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred under the
provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar
Passbooks Act, 1971 and rules framed thereunder and offends
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently
direct the 4th respondent to mutate petitioner's name in all web
land record of rights in conformity with her pattadar passbook
and title deed and pass such other order."
2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the
respondents, during hearing, Ms. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned
counsel for the petitioner limited her request to direct the 4th
respondent to dispose of the applications, dated 29-05-2019,
03-10-2019 and 01-04-2020 submitted by the petitioner, without
touching the merits of the case.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing
for respondents 1 to 4 readily agreed to dispose of the applications,
dated 29-05-2019, 03-10-2019 and 01-04-2020 submitted by the
petitioner, if any, pending with the respondent-authorities.
4. Recording 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 no
service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the
petitioner herself requested to issue a direction to the 4th respondent
to dispose of the applications, dated 29-05-2019, 03-10-2019 and
01-04-2020 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
4th respondent to dispose of the applications, dated 29-05-2019,
03-10-2019 and 01-04-2020 submitted by the petitioner, in
accordance with law, if they are pending, within four (04) weeks from
today. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 28.06.2021
ARR
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.12112 OF 2021
Date: 28.06.2021
ARR
