Disposed

Madi Sai Babu v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Dec 2018WP/39614/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge Bench held that the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner, exhibited unexplained inaction regarding a statutory appeal filed by the petitioner against a Gram Sabha resolution. The Court directed the Commissioner to decide the appeal within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to decide the statutory appeal within eight weeks of receiving a copy of this order.

Madi Sai Babu Vs State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.39614 of 2018

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

Heard counsel for petitioner and the Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondents.

¶4

According to the petitioner, he is a resident of Pasra Nagaram Village, Govindaraopeta Mandal, Jaya Shankar Bhupalapalli District and member of Gram Sabha of the said Village.

¶5

As against the Resolution dt.30.10.2017 said to have been passed by the Gram Sabha of the said village, petitioner herein preferred a Statutory Appeal under Rule 9 of the A.P. Panchayats Extension to Scheduled Areas(PESA) Rules, 2011 before the 2^nd respondent-Commissioner.

¶6

The grievance of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is, despite lapse of considerable length of time, no action whatsoever has been taken on the said appeal by the 2^nd respondent herein.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that in view of the inaction on the part of the 2^nd respondent in disposing of the Statutory Appeal, the villagers of the Grampanchayat are sustaining irreparable loss and hardship.

¶8

Since the petitioner herein filed Statutory Appeal, as long back as on 18.12.2017, this Court does not find any justification on the part of the 2^nd respondent in not passing any orders on the said Statutory Appeal.

¶9

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present Writ Petition with a direction to 2^nd respondent herein to pass appropriate orders on the appeal dt.18.12.2017 filed by the petitioner herein against the Gram Sabha Resolution dt.30.10.2017, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.

¶11

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as above. There

¶12

shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶14

___________________
A.V. SESHA SAI, J
14 th December, 2018
gra

Madi Sai Babu v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madi Sai Babu v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Swatantriya Kumar Vs The South Central Railway

Bathula Radha Krishna, Vs Union of India

Allu Venkata Ram Kumar Vs Union of India

A. Govardhan Reddy, Ananthapur Dist Vs Prl Secretary, Gad, Hyderabad and 3 Others

Bathula Naveen Kumar Vs Sri Kande Srinivasa Rao

Md. Mahaboob Beig Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh