Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S. Pusapati Developers Private ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 October, 2024
APHC010476802024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 24551 OF 2024
Between:
M/s. Pusapati Developers Private Limited.., ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DUNDU MANMOHAN
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
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 inaction of Respondent No.4 pursuant to the
representation dated 05.08.2024 and representations to Respondent No.3
and 5 dated 06.09.2022 and 25.01.2024 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of
the provisions of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and
subsequently to direct the Respondents No.4 to consider the representation
dated 05.08.2024 and permit the petitioner to upload their plan of the
proposed project of 5 Star Hotel at Yendada in Sy No 24/3B exempting the
upload of TDR and refund the vacant land tax that the petitioner herein is
exempted from and pass such other orders...."
2. Heard Ms.P. Sree Ramya, learned counsel, representing Mr. Dundu
Manmohan learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government
Pleader, Municipal Administration and Urban Development for the
respondents.
3. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the
respondents, during the course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner
requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the
representations dated 05.08.2024, 06.09.2022 and 25.01.2024 submitted by
the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.
4. In view of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, I need
not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents readily agreed to
dispose of the representations by the respondents as per directions of this
Court and requested to pass appropriate order.
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 petitioner
2019 (8) SCALE 544
himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representations dated
05.08.2024, 06.09.2022 and 25.01.2024 submitted by the petitioner, I find no
other alternative except to issue such direction.
6. In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission,
while directing the respondents to dispose of the representations dated
05.08.2024, 06.09.2022 and 25.01.2024 submitted by the petitioner, in
accordance with law, within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand
closed.
_______________________
DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J
Date: 28.10.2024
KK
