Smt. Peketi Satyavathi vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 274 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                 WRIT PETITION No.26745 OF 2016
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 the respondents 2 to 5 herein in not considering the representations made by the petitioner Dated 18.11.2015 and the Notice of the Petitioner Dated 23.04.2016 issued through her Counsel in granting the compensation to the petitioner for her land which was alleged to have been acquired by the Government for the purpose of Kakinada Special Economic zone Kakinada East Godavari District from the respondents 6 and 7 herein who are nothing to do with the property in Survey No.351/2 of AV Nagaram Village, Thondangi Mandal, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh to an extent of Ac.01.00 Cents which is under her possession and enjoyment of the same and in not making any enquiry with regard to the illegal acts of the respondents 6 and 7 herein to oust the benefits of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and also oppose to Articles 300-A of the Constitution of India as well as oppose to all cannons of Justice consequentially direct the respondents nos.2 to 5 herein not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in Survey No.351/2 of AV Nagaram Village, Thondangi Mandal, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh to an extent of Ac.01.00 Cents and pass such other order or orders."

Though the petitioner made several allegations against the

respondents, during hearing, Sri V.Sai Kumar, learned counsel for

the petitioner limited his request to dispose of the representation

dated 18.11.2015 and notice dated 23.04.2016 made by the

petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for

respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representation dated

18.11.2015 and notice dated 23.04.2016 submitted by the petitioner,

if any, pending with the respondent-authorities.

4. 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 not

serve to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner

himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the dispose of the

representation dated 18.11.2015 and notice dated 23.04.2016

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 18.11.2015 and

notice dated 23.04.2016 submitted by the petitioner and pass

appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8)

weeks from the date of receipt of a 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: 21.01.2022

PKR

2019 (8) SCALE 544

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION NO.26745 OF 2016

Date:21.01.2022

PKR