Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
D. Rajesh vs The District Collector on 25 February, 2021
Author: Battu Devanand
Bench: Battu Devanand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI ici
"ae
SRE
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, #7
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
: PRESENT: ii OR
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND ee,
1A No. 1 OF 2021
IN
WP NO: 23066 OF 2010
Between:
4. The District Collector, Kadapa, YSR District
2. The District Educational Officer, YSR Kadapa District, Kadapa
_..Petitioners/Respondents
(Respondents 1 & 2 in WP. 23066 OF 2010
on the file of High Court)
AND
4. D. Rajesh, S/o. Keshavulu (late), aged about 28 years, Un-Employee,
R/o. 3-41-A, Upparapally Village, Sidhout Mandal, Kadapa.
_., .Respondent/Petitioner
2. The Correspondent, SPBVD Sabha High School (Aided) Upparapally,
Madhavaram, Kadapa.
(Respondent No.2 not necessary to this petition)
.. Respondents
(Respondents in-do-)
Petition under Rule 12(i) (a) (iii) of Wit Rule R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in
f
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to
grant leave for filing counter affidavit in WP.No.23066 of 2010
The petition coming on for hearing and upon perusing the petition and affidavit
filed herein, and and upon hearing the arguments of GP for Schoo! Education for
Petitioners in IA. No. 1 of 2021 and Respondents Nos 1 and 2 in WP. No. 23066 of
2010, and Sri P. Amarender, Advocate for Respondent No.1 in IA. No 1 of 2021 and
Petitoners in W.P. No. 23066 of 2010, the Court made the following
ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND 1.A.No.1 of 2021 WRIT PETITION No. 23066 of 2010 ORDER:
This application is filed by the District Collector, Y.S.R.Kadapa District and the District Educational Officer, Y.S.R. Kadapa District who are the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the W.P.No.23066 of 2010 seeking leave of this Court for filing of counter affidavit in this Writ Petition.
2) The Writ Petition has been filed seeking appointment on compassionate grounds for untimely death of a Teacher died on 23.03.1990 in harness.
3) Upon perusing the averments made in the affidavit filed along with the application, this Court noticed the reason stated in the affidavit for non-filing of the counter affidavit for a long period of ten (10) years is that "due to the oversight the Counter is not filed".
4) It appears from the case record that the respondent No.1 was served notice on 12.10.2010 and the 2° respondent was served on 13.10.2010.
5S) AS per Rule 12 of Andhra Pradesh High Court Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977, the respondents/opposite parties in writ petitions, who intend to file counter-affidavits, they have to file it within six (06) months from the date of receipt of the notices. If they intend to file counter-affidavit beyond Stipulated period of Six months, they have to seek leave of the Court by filing appropriate application before the Court. The six months period stipulated under Rule 12
(ii) of Andhra Pradesh High Court Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977 was reduced to 120 days by way of amendment in the year, 2017,
6) All the litigant public and Advocates shall scrupulously follow the Rules framed by the High Court in this regard.
7) The Hon''ble Apex Court in various cases, time and again held that "the right of Speedy trial to be part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India".
8) ~~ In our Opinion, the Proposition of law is applicable to hear all branches of cases including Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9) Inthe present case, the respondents did not file any counter-affidavit for more than ten (10) years and now they come up with counter-affidavit along with the leave application. The reasons stated in the affidavit filed along with this application also established the negligence and carelessness of the respondents. The reason for inordinate, unexplained and negligent delay in filing counter-affidavit is not stated. This Court noticed that some Writ Petitions are pending for more than 20 years in which counters are not filed till date.
10) Inthe considered opinion of this Court that apart from various other reasons for the long pendency of the cases before this Court, the non-filing of counter affidavits by the respondents is one among the reasons. In most of these pending cases, it is seen that whenever cases are listed, the usual practice is to adjourn the cases on the ground that "counter is not filed" and "counsel for respondents sought time to file counter". Timely justice is the right of every litigant and speedy justice is the obligation of every functionary of the judicial system. Long pendency of cases in High Court has become a matter of serious concern. The prolonging pendency of cases, changes the priorities of the litigant towards their life. Therefore, speedy disposal should be recognized as an urgent need of the present judicial system in order to decide the fate of litigants. The huge _ delay will create a sense of frustration among the litigants.
11) The Central Government, the State Government and its instrumentalities are the biggest litigants in the country. Around 80% of all cases are either contested by the State Or appealed by it. Some appropriate steps have to be taken to regain the faith of the common man towards this institution. There should be a time limit for filing counters and unlimited time should not be provided for filing counters. The officers of the Government and its instrumentalities should be made more accountable for disposal of long pendency of cases.
12) For the above mentioned reasons, this Court is of the opinion it is appropriate to send a message to all the litigants, who are respondents and particularly to the Officers of State and Central Government and _ its instrumentalities, who are responsible for non-filing of counter affidavits after receipt of the notice, which is causing abnormal delay in disposal of the cases by this Court.
13) Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2021 is allowed granting leave to the petitioners herein/respondent Nos.1 and 2 in this Writ Petition to file counter-affidavit on condition of payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the writ petitioner, within a period of ten (10) days from today and file proof of payment of costs before this Court within four days thereafter. The costs paid by the respondents be recovered from the officers (whether they are in service or retired from the service) responsible for the delay in filing the counter-affidavit.
14) Registry is directed to send a copy of this Order to the Chief Secretary of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Advocate General of the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Assistant Solicitor General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, for issuing necessary instructions to all the officers concerned, to follow Rule 12(ii) of Andhra Pradesh High Court Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977 in true spirit, to enable this Court to dispose the matters as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-M.Suryanadha Reddy ASSISTANT RESISTRAR : 'OFFICER TRUE COPY! cor SECTION District YSR Kadapa Vs dapa ollector: Ka YSR Kadapa District, Ka gapu i ravati (by A.P Secretariat at Vela di, Ama AP., at Amaravati (by Spl.
' Spl. Messenger) P,,
4. The Assistant Solicitor Gen Messenger) he Advocate 5 Wo CCs to GP for enger) ;
7 one OC to sri P. Amaren g. One spare copy skm . ses -
'ah Court of eral High 1. Messenger) ti (by SP ral, High Court of AP. 2 am { 1 naravati (by SP! oe Sct tion, Hig Pe School Educatio™ er der Advocate(by Spl. Messeng ) HIGH COURT DEV,J DATED:25/02/2021 ORDER IA. No 1 of 2021 IN WP.No.23066 of 2010 DIRECTION | > SRpectAt c 7 er es ZZOF ANDH Cc Ve \ % 26 FEB | * * \cesenrexe "QIGH