Partly allowed

Smt Chille Marthamma v. The District Collector

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Aug 2022WP/1652/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants a conditional relief in a writ petition alleging untouchability and illegal construction. The Court bypassed the merits, directed the respondents to dispose of a pending representation within four weeks, citing the apex court judgment in Govt. of India v. P. Venkatesh to avoid easy disposal orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 29.10.2018 within four weeks from the date of the order.

Smt Chille Marthamma Vs The District… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARULU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.1652 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 a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus i Declaring the inaction of the official respondents in not preventing the villagers of VakalaGaruvu village hamlet of KanchustambaPalem village panchayath Elamanchilimandal West Godavari District from practicing acts of untouchability against the petitioners ii The action of the official respondents in constructing the Public lavatories opposite to the house of the petitioners in VakalaGaruvu village of Kanchustarnbapalem village and panchayath Yelamanchilimandal as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional iii The action of the official respondents in allowing the unofficial respondents to instigate the villagers and village officials VakalaGaruvu village KanchustambaPalem village panchayath Elamanchilimandal West Godavari District to commit atrocities against the petitioners illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional iv To direct the official respondent nos 2 to 9 to reopen the case in Crime No 133/2018 of Yelamanchili Police Station for the purpose of further investigation and to direct than to arrest the unofficial respondents 10 to 15 v To direct the respondents concerned for providing escort to the 2nd petitioner to enter into his village VakalaGaruvu hamlet of KanchustambaPalem village panchayath Yelamanchilimandal West Godavari District so as t enble him to leave with the first petitioner and his wife vi To direct the official respondents 1 to 8 to demolish the Public lavatories situated opposite to the house of the petitioners in VakalaGaruvu village hamlet of KanchustambaPalem panchayath Yelamanchili mandal West Godavari District vii To direct the official respondents to provide protection to the petitioners to complete the house in VakalaGaruvu Village and hamlet of KanchustambaPalem village panchayath Yelamanchilim andal West Godavari District and to pass such other Orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper circumstances of this case.”

¶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 29.10.2018.

¶7

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 29.10.2018, pending with the authorities.

¶8

In view of the submission of the learned 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

¶9

¶10

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 representation dated 29.10.2018, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶11

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representations of the petitioners dated 29.10.2018 within four (4) weeks from today. No costs.

¶12

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

¶13

_____________________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARULU NIMMAGADDA

¶14

Date: 23.08.2022 SP

¶15

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

Smt Chille Marthamma v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Chille Marthamma v. The District Collector

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

K.Meena Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission

Challa Naresh Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanikanti Diwakar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Moulali Saheb Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mudavathu Vishnu Naik Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Uppalapati Manemma, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh