Gude Uday Nageswara Rao, vs The Stateof Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 4510 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                 WRIT PETITION No.19823 OF 2016


ORDER:-

       This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief/s:-

      "... to issue a Writ or direction, more particularly one in
      the nature of writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents

1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 17.03.2016 in respect of the land to an extent of Ac 70.00 cents in survey No.693/1 and 2, Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with our peaceful possession and the enjoyment of the fish tank by any third parties and pass such other or orders ..."

2. Heard both sides.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that, he is the

resident of Ponangi Village, Eluru Mandal and there is a fish

tank in Ponangi Village in R.S.No.693/1 admeasuring an

extent of 70 acres. The 4th respondent and his sub-ordinates

tried to mutate the names of some third party inspite of

deleting the names of his predecessors in title, without any

enquiry or without issuance of any notice. The weaker

sections of the village made representations dated

17.03.2016, 26.02.2016 and 27.04.2016 to consider them

and take appropriate action with a request not to mutate the

names of the third party in the revenue records. But no

action was taken. Hence, the Writ Petition.

4. Though the petitioner made several allegations against

the respondents, during 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 representations dated 17.03.2016, 26.02.2016 and

27.04.2016 in accordance with law.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue,

readily agreed to dispose of the representations of the

petitioner, dated 17.03.2016, 26.02.2016 and 27.04.2016, if

any, pending with the authorities.

5. In view of the submission of the learned Assistant

Government Pleader, I need not decide the truth of 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 dispose of

the representations dated 17.03.2016, 26.02.2016 and

27.04.2016, I find no other alternative except to issue such

direction.

6. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the

stage of admission, with the consent of both counsel,

directing the 4th respondent to dispose of the representations

dated 17.03.2016, 26.02.2016 and 27.04.2016 in accordance

with law, within eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of

copy of this order. No costs.

2019 (8) SCALE 544

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Date : 03-11-2021

EPS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION No.19823 OF 2016

Date : 03-11-2021

EPS