Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The Gayatri Matha Sand And Boat Labour ... vs The State Of Ap on 6 November, 2024
APHC010479812024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 24902 OF 2024
Between:
The Gayatri Matha Sand And Boat Labour Contract ...PETITIONER(S)
Cooperative Society Limited and Others
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. K NAVEEN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD
2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY
The Court made the following:
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 in not disposing the
representations of petitioners dated 06.08.2024, 29.07.2024, 16.09.2021,
12.09.2021, 10.09.2021, 08.09.2021, 16.01.2021 and 16.02.2021 seeking allotment
of reaches for de-siltation in foreshore of Prakasam Barrage as being arbitrary, illegal
and unconstitutional of violative of Article 19 and 300-A of Constitution of India and
pass such other orders...."
2. Heard Mr. K. Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mrs. Sudeepti Potluri, learned Assistant Government Pleader, Mines and
Geology for the respondents.
3. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the
respondents, during the course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioners
requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the
representations dated 06.08.2024, 29.07.2024, 16.09.2021, 12.09.2021,
10.09.2021, 08.09.2021, 16.01.2021 and 16.02.2021 submitted by the
petitioners, without touching the merits of the case.
4. In view of the same, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the
allegations made in the petition.
5. 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 be passed 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 petitioners
himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representations dated
06.08.2024, 29.07.2024, 16.09.2021, 12.09.2021, 10.09.2021, 08.09.2021,
16.01.2021 and 16.02.2021 submitted by the petitioners, I find no other
alternative except to issue such direction.
2019 (8) SCALE 544
6. In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, while directing the
respondents to dispose of representations dated 06.08.2024, 29.07.2024,
16.09.2021, 12.09.2021, 10.09.2021, 08.09.2021, 16.01.2021 and
16.02.2021, in accordance with law, within three (03) months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand
closed.
_______________________
DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J
Date: 06.11.2024
KK
