Penumatsa Venkata Subadramma, ... vs Prl. Secretary, Municipal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 56 AP

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                  WRIT PETITION NO.37057 OF 2015
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:

"to issue an appropriate writ, direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 3rd and 5th respondents in not considering the petitioners representations dated 2.11.2015 and thereby giving possession certificate by the 5th respondent and thereby levying vacant land tax by the 3rd respondent on the petitioners properties in an extent of 300 sq.yards in Sy.No.5/3, TP.No.41/71 (42/71), Plot No.13 and to extent of 450 sq.yards in Sy.No.5/3, TP.No.41/71 (42/71), Plot No.14 Buchirajupalem village, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, malafide and against the principles of natural justice and is contrary to the procedure contemplated under law and also in violation of Constitution rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents not to entertain the request of the 6 th respondent without conducting any enquiry on the petitioners representations dated 02.11.2015."

Though the petitioners made several allegations against the

respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners

requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to

issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation

of the petitioners dated 02.11.2015.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily

agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated

02.11.2015, if any pending with the authorities.

In view of the submission 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 MSM,J WP_37057_2015

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

petitioners himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the

representation dated 02.11.2015, I find no other alternative except to

issue such direction.

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the

respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated

02.11.2015, in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from

today. No costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 06.01.2022 Ksp

2019 (8) SCALE 544