Smt. V.Chinna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4545 AP

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                    WRIT PETITION No. 22641 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 respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in trying to dispossess the family of the petitioner from house bearing No.4-4 admeasuring 0-02 ½ cents or 100 Sq.yards in part and parcel of Sy. No.197 situated near Government Hospital Compound, Chingarapalli village, Irala Mandal, Chittoor District, which is in exclusive peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioner‟s family since more than 25 years, without following the procedure contemplated under law, despite submission of representation, dated 20-09-1021 to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 as wholly illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, void, violative of principles of natural justice and affected the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to grant house site patta by considering the representation, dated 20.09.2021 with reference to house bearing No. 4-4 situated near Hospital Compound, Chigarapalli village of Irala Mandal, Chittoor District and and pass such other order..."

2. The case of petitioner is that she occupied a small extent of site

for the purpose of residence i.e., an extent of Ac. 0-02 ½ cents out of total

extent of Ac. 3-89 cents classified as „Gayaalu‟ in Sy. No. 197 of

Chingarapalli village, Irala Mandal, Chittoor District. The petitioner is

residing in said site by constructing a tin sheeted roof house and local

Government assigned house number provided by Gram Panchayat and

electricity connection bearing No. 5633301000624, she has also got gas

connection in her name. The respondents without following the procedure

contemplated under law trying to dispossess the petitioner‟s family from

the subject property.

3. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made a representation, dated

20-09-2021 to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4. As there is no response from

the authorities concerned, she questioned the inaction of respondents in

this Writ Petition and requested to issue appropriate direction.

4. During hearing, learned counsel for petitioner reiterated the

contentions urged in the affidavit. Whereas, the learned Assistant

Government Pleader for Revenue requested to issue appropriate direction

to respondent Nos.2 to 4 to dispose of the representation submitted by the

petitioner.

5. As could be seen from the material available on record, the

petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property and that the

petitioner proved her prima facie possession over the property. However,

learned counsel for the petitioner limited his request to dispose of the

representation submitted by the petitioner. On the other hand, learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue admitted the possession of

petitioner over the subject property and requested to pass appropriate

orders.

6. Recording to the submission of the learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Revenue and considering the contentions of the learned

counsel for the petitioner, I find it is a fit case to issue a direction to

respondent Nos. 2 and 4 to dispose of the representation, dated

20.09.2021 in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the

admission stage, with the consent of both the counsels. No costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 08.10.2021

Psr.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION No.22641 of 2021

Date: 08-10-2021

Psr.

Recording the submissions 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 himself requested to issue a direction to dispose

of the representations, dated 27.07.2020 and 15.03.2021 made by the

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

2019 (8) SCALE 544