Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ravada Appa Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 January, 2020
Author: M. Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M. Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.21352 OF 2019
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the-Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, questioning the inaction of 1st respondent in disposing of Revision Petition, dt.17-03-2013 by this petitioner and his mother against order,dt.24-05-1994 in Rc.No.158/1994 HA, in respect of land to an extent of Ac.1.14 cents in Sy.No.156/3 of Paradesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam District and in not implementing the orders of this Court in W.P.No.5621 of 2014, dt.06-03-2014, and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the Revision Petition, dt.17-03-2013 filed by this petitioner and his mother.
Though the petitioner made several allegations about the inaction of the 4th respondent in disposing of the Revision Petition pendency before it, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignments fairly conceded that the said Revision Petition is not disposed of and requested to issue appropriate direction to the 1st respondent. However, pending of Revision Petition is not in dispute and an order dt.06-03-2014 in W.P.No.5621 of 2014 was issued by this Court directing to dispose of the Revision Petition. Despite the order passed by this Court, even after lapse of six (06) years, the 1st respondent did not dispose of the Revision Petition pending before it and this attitude of the 1st respondent is depreciable in not disposing the Revision Petition, in spite of direction issued by this Court, which would amount to contempt as 1st respondent disobeyed the order willfully, prima facie.
Keeping the Revision pending for six (06) years despite the direction of this Court in W.P.No.5621 of 2014, dt.06-03-2014 is nothing but a violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the 2 Constitution of India and therefore such inaction on the part of the 1st respondent, is declared as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, I find it is appropriate to issue a direction to dispose of the Revision Petition, dt.17-03-2013, within four (04) weeks from today on serving order within one month thereafter by learned Assistant Government for Assignments with acknowledgement due on the Revision Petition.
It is needless to remind to the 1st respondent the consequences of violation of order of this Court.
With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed, at the stage of admission, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________________ JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 29-01-2020 Note: Furnish CC by 29-01-2020.
B/o.
IS 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.21352 OF 2019 Date: 22-01-2020 Note: Furnish CC by 29-01-2020.
B/o.
IS