Disposed

Marika Surya Lakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Feb 2020WP/2746/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioners sought a direction to dispose of their pending representation dated 16.12.2019 regarding alleged illegal threat to dispossess them from land. The Court declined to adjudicate merits

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 16.12.2019, if pending, within four weeks from the date of the order.

Marika Surya Lakshmi, Vs the Tahsildar — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.2746 OF 2020

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

¶4

of India seeking the following relief:

¶5

“to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in threatening to dispossess the Petitioners from their land in Sy.No.22/8 Ac.2.00 Cents in Kasipatnam Revenue Village, Ananthagiri Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal and arbitrary consequently direct the Respondent not to interfere with the land of the Petitioners in Sy.No.22/8 Ac.2.00 cents situated at Kasipatnam Revenue Village, Ananthgiri Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following due process of law.”

¶6

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 16.12.2019.

¶7

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 16.12.2019, if any pending with the authorities.

¶8

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 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

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

MSM,J WP_2746_2020

representation dated 16.12.2019, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶13

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 16.12.2019, if any pending, in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from today. No costs.

¶14

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶15

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶16

18.02.2020 Ksp

Marika Surya Lakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marika Surya Lakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

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

Govada Nireekshana Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Jammalla Sudhakar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sunkara Nageswara Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Vadlamudi Koteswari Vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Angadala Nagamani Vs the State of Ap

B.V.K.B.N. Ramana Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh