Mallikarjunappa vs State Of Ap
2021 Latest Caselaw 4500 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY


                  WRIT PETITION No.11300 of 2020


ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:

"to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.4 when the revision is pending before the respondent No.2 since 07.03.2020 against the orders of the respondent No.3 in Rc.No.161/20/B, dated 15.02.2020 due to pandemic the respondent No.2 did not pass any order on stay petition in the revision. Meanwhile the respondent No.4 herein is implementing the orders of the respondent No.3 is illegal, improper and arbitrary. Without filing any supported documents by the respondent Nos.5 and 6 which was categorically held by the respondent No.3 in his proceedings but cancelling the petitioner's patta on 10.05.2009 vide Sy.No.716/5 an extent of Ac.5.10 cents, situated at Gudibanda Village and Mandal, Ananthapuram District is not sustainable, consequently the proceedings of the respondent No.2 is liable to be set-sided and pass"

2. Though the petitioner 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

application/representation dated 28.05.2020 submitted by the

petitioner.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for

respondents readily agreed to dispose of the

application/representation dated 28.05.2020 submitted by the

petitioner, if any pending with the respondent authorities.

MSM,J WP_11300_2020

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 petitioner himself

requested to issue a direction to dispose of the

application/representation dated 28.05.2020 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 application/representation

dated 28.05.2020 submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with

law, within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order. No order as to costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

03.11.2021 DR

2019 (8) SCALE 544