Court disposed of petition filed seeking direction to authorities to dispose of a representation regarding property valuation, citing precedent against quick dismissals but issuing direction per counsel's submission.
Direction to respondents to dispose of representation dated 11.12.2019 within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.5753 OF 2021
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not disposing the representation of the petitioner dated 11.12.2019 and not issue valuation certificate to the property is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also violation of Articles 14, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent to dispose the representation and issue valuation of the property.”
Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 11.12.2019.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 11.12.2019, if any pending with the authorities.
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 petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the
1 2019 (8) SCALE 544
MSM,J WP_5753_2021
2
representation dated 11.12.2019, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 11.12.2019, in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from today. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
20.07.2021 Ksp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a direction should be issued to the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 11.12.2019.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
The Government of India v. P.VenkateshReferred¶7
(2019) 8 SCALE 544
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
