Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, vs Amaravati Rajadhani Sameekarana ... on 12 January, 2024
Author: U.Durga Prasad Rao
Bench: U.Durga Prasad Rao
34, 35 & 36
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No. W.A.Nos.13515, 13516 & 13517 of 20235
PROCEEDINGS SHEET
Sl.
No
DATE
ORDER
OFFICE
NOTE
02.
12.01.2024
These three Letters Patent appeals have been
preferred against the common judgment and order,
dated 21.12.2083 passed in a batch of writ petitions
bearing Nos.31384, 318356 & 31838 of 2083.
The writ petitions were preferred challenging
the order of the Government bearing G.O.Rt.No0.2283,
dated 22.11.2023, issued by the General
Administration (Political.A) Department, whereby
the decision was taken by the Government to
establish a Camp Office for the Chief Minister and
accommodation for supporting senior functionaries
at Visakhapatnam, purportedly for proper
supervision and implementation of different welfare
and development programmes in the North Coastal
Districts.
The case of the petitioners was that the
Government was in fact attempting to shift the
W.A.Nos.1315, 1316 & 1317 of 2023
Secretariat from Amaravatito Visakhapatnam under
the camouflage of establishing a Camp Office at
Visakhapatnam even when they had failed to achieve
that end in terms of the common judgment and
order, dated 03.03.2022 rendered by a Full Bench of
this Court in W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch.
The case of the petitioners was that what could
not be achieved directly cannot be permitted to be
achieved indirectly through the mechanism of the
aforementioned impugned G.O.
It appears that Interlocutory Applications were
filed by the appellants/State requesting the learned
single Judge to direct the listing of the writ petitions
before the Full Bench hearing W.P.No.1352035 of 2020
& batch. In that regard, the learned single Judge
proceeded to record as under:
"The respondent/State Government filed
interlocutory applications to issue directions for
listing the present writ petitions before the
Hon'ble Full Bench hearing the W.P No.15208 of
2020 and batch for proper and effective
adjudication of the lis. Though the respondents
made a request, I being the Presiding Judge of
W.A.Nos.1315, 1316 & 1317 of 2023
the Court cannot issue such direction to the
Hon'ble The Chief Justice for listing or tagging
the matters along with pending writ petitions, if
any and itis the prerogative of the Hon'ble The
Chief Justice to take appropriate decision, being
the Master of the roster. Consequently, the
request of the learned Special Government
Pleader is not acceded to.
However, the Registry is directed to
place the matters before The Hon'ble The Chief
Justice to take appropriate decision, as to
whether these writ petitions be tagged to the
pending matters before the Full Bench of this
Court to be decided with the said matters or
otherwise, only to avoid passing of any
conflicting orders indirectly."
While ordering so, the learned single Judge
proceeded to issue directions restraining the State
Government from taking any steps to shift/relocate
the offices/departments from the Secretariat at
Amaravati to Visakhapatnam pursuant' to
G.O.Rt.No.2283, dated 22.11.2023. It is this order,
which is under challenge in the present Letters
W.A.Nos.1315, 1316 & 1317 of 2023
Patent appeals.
Learned Advocate General would submit that
the learned single Judge ought not to have proceeded
to pass the order impugned staying the operation of
G.O.Rt.No.2283 inasmuch as it was appropriate that
the Full Bench consider the same.
Our attention was drawn to an order, dated
02.11.2020 passed by the Full Bench inter alia in
IA.No.4 of 2020 filed in WP.No.13203 of 2020 and in
IA.No.1 of 2020 in WP.No.142828 of 2020. In the said
Interlocutory Applications, the applicants had
sought an order against the Government restraining
them from taking any steps towards shifting any of
the offices of the State Government inter alia the
Chief Minister's Camp Office, Offices of the
Secretariat/Heads of the Department of the
Government, Police Department etcetera.
The Full Bench, however, permitted the
applicants/petitioners to approach the Full Bench as
and when there was a proposal for construction of
Camp Office at places other than the place where the
Executive Capital was located.
W.A.Nos.1315, 1316 & 1317 of 2023
In the context of the aforementioned order
passed by the Full Bench, learned Advocate General
sought to bring home the point that even when the
said order was clear and unambiguous that the issue
including one pertaining to establishment of a Camp
Office was to be considered by the Full Bench, yet, the
learned single Judge had proceeded to pass the order
impugned.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
As per the stand of the learned Advocate
General before the learned single Judge which was
reiterated before us today, the issue is required to be
considered only by the Full Bench in terms of the
order, dated 02.11.2020.
Learned counsel for the respondents -
petitioners, however, express no objection to the
issue being considered by the Full Bench in the
backdrop of the order, dated 02.11.2020.
Although the learned Advocate General insists
upon staying the orders of the learned single Judge,
we are of the opinion that it would be more
appropriate that the issues raised in the writ
W.A.Nos.1315, 1316 & 1317 of 2023
petitions as also the grounds urged in the present
Letters Patent appeals are heard and considered by
the Full Bench.
Be that as it may, we direct the Registry to post
these matters before the Full Bench.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
Vil
