Disposed

K.Ramana Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Dec 2020WP/23795/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Supreme Court directed respondent authorities to dispose of a specific representation filed by the petitioner regarding an EWS certificate an en. The Court, following the petitioner's counsel suggestion and a Supreme Court precedent, avoided deciding merits and mandated expedited disposal within one month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to dispose of the representation dated 19.05.2020 within one month.

K.Ramana Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.23795 of 2020

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶4

“….issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondent No.2 in taking up the miscellaneous petition, dated 19.05.2020, filed by the petitioner seeking to conduct enquiry against issuance of the Economic Weaker Section Certificate in favour of the respondent No.4, and to cancel the same, for hearing and dispose off the same as arbitrary, illegal, abdication of the statutory duty cast on him apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to take up the Miscellaneous petition, dated 19.05.2020 filed by the petitioner for hearing and dispose of the same expeditiously and pass such other order or orders….”

¶5

Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, Smt.S.Parineeta, learned counsel for the petitioner, requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to dispose of the representation, dated 19.05.2020, submitted by the petitioner.

¶6

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 readily agreed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation, dated 19.05.2020, if any, pending with the respondent authorities.

¶7

In view of the submission of learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the writ petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the

¶8

MSM,J W.P.No.23795 of 2020

¶9

¶10

Apex Court in The Government of India vs. 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 petitioner herself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation, dated 19.05.2020, submitted by the petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶11

In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent Nos.1 to 3 to dispose of the representation, dated 19.05.2020, submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

¶13

_____________________________ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J

23^rd December, 2020

GHN

1 2019(8) SCALE 544

MSM,J

W.P.No.23795 of 2020

K.Ramana Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ramana Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Venkatesh Babu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

CherukuruBabavalli, Vs The Regional Director-cum-Appellate Commissioner of Municipal Administration

Yettapu Padmavathamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chunduru Prasanna Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kolli Ravi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanchumarthi Sarojini Devi Vs State of Andhra Pradesh