Bollam Srinivas v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE Dr . JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER W RI T PETI TI ON No.6 6 5 5 of 2 0 1 9 ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, seeking a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the representation, dated 20.12.2016, submitted by the petitioner along with others, pursuant to the direction given by this Court in Writ Petition No.4030 of 2016, dated 16.11.2016, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to dispose of the said representation. 2 .

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondents and perused the record.

3 .

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is a landless poor person. He, along with some others, submitted a representation, dated 20.12.2016, to the respondents to allocate some Government land in his favour. The authorities concerned have not acted upon the said representation yet. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner sought similar relief by filing W.P.No.4030 of 2016 before this Court, which was disposed by of this Court on 16.11.2016, directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation and in such an event, the respondents shall deal with the same in accordance with law at the earliest. Pursuant to the said direction of this Court, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 20.12.2016, to the

respondents. However, no action has been taken on the said representation. The limitation to file a contempt case is one year from the date of the order. Hence, he is constrained to file the present writ petition.

4 .

There is no dispute with regard to the petitioner filing W.P.No.4030 of 2016 before this Court seeking the same relief and pursuant to the direction given in the said Writ Petition by this Court, he submitted a representation, dated 20.12.2016, to the respondents. The learned Assistant Government Pleader fairly conceded that limitation to file a Contempt Case is one year from the date of the order. Since no action has been taken by the respondents on the representation, dated 20.12.2016, submitted by the petitioner, a direction can be given to the respondents to dispose of the said representation. 5 .

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to examine the representation, dated 20.12.2016, submitted by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6 .

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J 25th April, 2019 Bvv