Dondeti Venkateshwarulu, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT Writ Petition No.24557 of 2017 ORDER:

Though the prayer is one against inaction, this court is not inclined to exercise its discretion or jurisdiction and issue directions to the 3rd respondent to look into the appeal filed on 25.03.2017. The appeal was filed on 25.03.2017. The petitioner ought not to entertain the idea that the administration should go after his appeal and decide expeditiously. It is always desirable that little breathing time be given to the authorities in looking into grievances and passing orders. Further, there should be demand/ refusal or reminder on the appeal already filed, and if inaction still continues, then a suitable prayer can be made for consideration by this court. The inaction complained by a party is again examined from different considerations viz.

, nature of prayer or grievance, hardship complained, whether timely decision is required to be taken or not. The discretion to issue Mandamus for disposing of appeals whether statutory or otherwise ought not to be a matter of course. For the above reasons, the writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to file fresh writ petition, if decision is not taken after demand/ refusal. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. ____________ S.V.BHATT, J Date: 25.07.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT Writ Petition No.24557 of 2017 25-07-2017 Prv