Kasani Nageswara Rao vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1217 AP

             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                              W.P. No.4983 of 2021

O R D E R:-

          This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief:

          ".....to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not

re-inducing the petitioner into service in view of the variation in the enquiry report submitted vide reference of the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from contrary to CCA & CS Rules, and hence, the impugned compulsory retirement order dated 08.12.2016 of the 3rd respondent is liable to be set aside and consequently direct respondents 2 to 4 authorities to reinstate the petitioner into service with effect from 08.12.2016 with all consequential benefits in view of the report submitted by the 4th and 5th respondents."

Though Sri K.Srinivasa Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner,

made several allegations against the respondents during the course of

hearing, he requested this Court, without touching the merits of the

case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the

representations submitted by the petitioner on 09.09.2016, 25.08.2017,

20.05.2019 and 16.09.2020.

The learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the

respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representations of the

petitioner dated 09.09.2016, 25.08.2017, 20.05.2019 and 16.09.2020, if

any, pending with the respondent authorities.

In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for

Services-II, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations

made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction can

be issued in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of 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

2019 (8) SCALE 544 2 MSM,J WP_4983_2021

cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself

requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representations dated

09.09.2016, 25.08.2017, 20.05.2019 and 16.09.2020 submitted by the

petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents to dispose of the representations submitted by the

petitioner on 09.09.2016, 25.08.2017, 20.05.2019 and 16.09.2020, in

accordance with law, within a period of one month from today. No

order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand

disposed of as infructuous.

__________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J 01.03.2021

bcj