Allowed

Marri Vijaya Kumar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2022WP/26721/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging non-appointment under compassionate grounds. Instead of deciding merits, the Court directed Respondent No. 2 to dispose of specific representations within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The 2nd respondent directed to dispose of representations dated 07.01.2019 and 23.08.2019 within six weeks.

Marri Vijaya Kumar Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.26721 OF 2022

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶5

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶6

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not appointing the petitioner on compassionate grounds since 2016 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in suitable post by passing appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible and pass such other orders....”

¶7

Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during the course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representations dated 07.01.2019 and 23.08.2019 submitted by the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the Government Pleader for Home readily agreed to dispose of the representations dated 07.01.2019 and 23.08.2019 submitted by the petitioner, if any pending with the respondent authorities.

¶9

¶10

In view of the submission of learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition.

¶11

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 be passed for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but, they do not serve to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representations dated 07.01.2019 and 23.08.2019 submitted by the petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶12

In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, while directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of representations dated 07.01.2019 and 23.08.2019 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶13

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

¶14

¶15

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

¶16

also stand closed.

¶17

___________________________ DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J

¶18

Date: 16.09.2022

¶19