Smt. K. Seetha Mahalakshmi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1052 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                  WRIT PETITION NO.15169 OF 2016
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:-

"....to issue a Writ or order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the high handed action of the Respondents 2, 3 &4 in - (1) trying to include the petitioners patta land vide Patta No.24, 25, 26 & 27 in Survey No.174/1 to an extent of Ac.4.72 cents agricultural dry land, situated at Madhurawada Village, Chinnagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as Government Land, (2) in not considering and disposing of the petitioners representation on 08.05.2015 by way of Registered Post and Acknowledgement Due, pursuant to the paper publication dated 01.05.2015 and (3) in interfering into the petitioners land as stated supra, without issuing any notice and without following the procedure is arbitrary bad and illegal and violation of Principles of natural justice and violation of Article -14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and without jurisdiction, consequently quash the Paper Publication dated 01.05.2015 issued by the 2nd Respondent to the extent of petitioner's agricultural land only and also direct the Respondents 3 and 4 not to interfere into the petitioner's land, in the interest of justice and pass such order or orders".

2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the

respondents, during hearing Smt K.Seetha Mahalakshmi, learned

counsel for the petitioner limited his request to dispose of the

representation dated 08.05.2015 made by the petitioner, without

touching the merits of the case.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Revenue, appearing for respondents readily agreed to dispose of the

representation dated 08.05.2015 submitted by the petitioner, if any,

pending with the respondent-authorities.

4. Recording the submissions of the learned Assistant

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 not serve to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel

for the petitioner requested to issue a direction to dispose of the

representation dated 08.05.2015 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

respondents to dispose of the representation dated 08.05.2015

submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate order in

accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of

copy of this order, if it is pending. No costs.

As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall

also stand closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Date: 25.02.2022

SSP

2019 (8) SCALE 544

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION NO.15169 OF 2016

Date: 25.02.2022

ssp