Shaik Bibi John, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Bibi John, W/o Khaleesha, Aged 45 years, Occ - House Wife, R/o B.C. Colony, Krishnapuram Village, Budavada Panchayath, Marripadu Mandal S.P.S.R. Nellore District.

¶10

...Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶13

The A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd, Tirupati, rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director.

¶14

The Chairman and Managing Director, A.P. Southern Power^Distribution Company Ltd., Tirupati.

¶15

The Superintending Engineer, A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Opp- to Rajarajeswari Amma vari temple,^SPSRNellore District.

¶16

The Divisional Engineer, A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., AtmakurTown, Atmakur, SPSR Nellore District.

¶17

The Assistant Divisional Engineer, A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Marripadu, Marripadu Mandal, SPSR Nellore^District.

¶18

The Assistant Engineer, A.P. Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Marripadu, Marripadu Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶19

Shaik Chinnababu, S/o Chinna Masthan Aged 48 years,^R/oB.C. colony, Krishnapuram Village, Budavada Panchayath,^Marripadu Mandal, S.P.S.R. Nellore District.

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or writs or order or orders^{onemoreparticularlyin} the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 2nd to 7th respondents in not disposing of petitioners representation^{dt.30.12.2024as} illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently^{directthe2ndto7th} respondents to forthwith dispose petitioners representation^{dt.30.12.2024.}

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,^{theHighCourtmaybe} pleased to direct the 2nd to 7th respondents to conduct enquiry in pursuance of my representation dt.30.12.2024.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. DHANUNJAYA BARU

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENERGY

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 7: SRI K VENKATA^RAMARAOSC FOR APSPDCL

¶26

The Court made the following order:

¶27

[3329]

¶28

APHC010009352025

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

WEDNESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 664/2025

¶34

Between:

¶35

...PETITIONER Shaik Bibi John

¶36

AND

¶37

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶38

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶40

1.DHANUNJAYA BARU

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent{S):

¶42

1.GP FOR ENERGY

¶43

The Court made the following:

¶44

THE HON’BLE

¶45

SRI JUSTICE VFNKATESWARI IJ NIMMAGADDA

¶46

WRIT PETITION No.664 of 2025

¶47

ORDER:

¶48

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the^{Constitutionof} seeking the following relief;

¶49

India

¶50

"to issue a writ or writs or order or orders one more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 2 nd to in not disposing of petitioner’s representation respondents unconstitutional and dt. 30.122024 as illegal, arbitrary and nd to 7th respondents to forthwith dispose consequently direct the 2 dt. 30.12.2024 and to pass such other order petitioner’s representation or orders ”

¶51

counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the 2. Heard learned respondents.

¶52

submits that it will be suffice if a 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner particularly, respondent Nos. direction is given to respondent authorities, more dated 30.12.2024 submitted by the 2 to 7 to consider the representation petitioner.

¶53

would submit that the 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted by the petitioner would be representation dated 30.12.2024 considered by the respondent authorities in accordance^{withlaw,withina} reasonable time.

¶54

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents, without touching merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation dated 30.12.2024 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, after issuing notice and after providing opportunity of hearing to the both parties, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶55