Disposed

Gongati Syamsundara Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC27 Feb 2020WP/3851/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging non-consideration of a Saw Mill licence renewal was disposed of. The Court directed the respondent to consider and decide the pending application within two weeks, distinguishing a Supreme Court judgment against issuing summary directions.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's application dated 20.12.2019 within two months from the receipt of this order.

Gongati Syamsundara Reddy Vs The State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.3851 OF 2020

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed questioning the action of 2^nd respondent in not considering the petitioner’s application dated 20.12.2019, for renewal of Saw Mill licence, declare the same illegal and arbitrary.

¶4

Though the petitioner made several allegations against respondents, during hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, to issue direction to 2^nd respondent, without touching the merits of the case, to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 20.12.2019.

¶5

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue also readily agreed to dispose of application of petitioner, dated 20.12.2019, if any, pending with the authorities.

¶6

In view of the submission made by 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 petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the application dated

¶7

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

¶8

¶9

20.12.2019, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶10

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing 2^nd respondent to consider and dispose of the application of petitioner dated 20.12.2019, in accordance with law, within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no costs.

¶11

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶13

Dated 27.02.2020 Rvk

Gongati Syamsundara Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gongati Syamsundara Reddy v. The 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

Manam Venkata Pranav Gopal, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Manam Venkata Pranav Gopal Vs the State of Ap

Anangi Prasad Naidu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kaligineti Sudha Vs the State of Ap

Harijan Ranga Swamy Vs the State of Ap

V Lakshmi Narasamma Vs The Sate of Andhra Pradesh