Nereegondha Musalayya v. The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI Writ Petition No.4052 of 2012 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief/s: 'to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents on not passing any orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner inspite of the recommendations as arbitrary, illegal, improper and the notice in Rc.No.UP05/2012 dated 28.01.2012 of the 4th respondent herein as arbitrary, illegal, improper and without jurisdiction and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 05.12.2011 submitted by the petitioner and pass such other order or orders.'

[Reproduced verbatim] I have heard the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. There is no representation for the petitioner. I have perused the material record.

The grievance of the petitioner, from a reading of the writ petition, appears to be is that the petitioner's representation for remission of lease amount was not considered. This Court on 16.02.2012 passed the following interim order in WPMP.No.5104 of 2012:

"....Under the circumstances, the second respondent/the District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada, shall pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner and others, dated 05.12.2011, in respect of the remission of the lease amount for 1421 fasli within one (01) week from the date of communication of these orders and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till the service of the communication of the decision of the second respondent on the petitioner, no further action be taken on the impugned urgent notice, dated 28.01.2012, by the 4th respondent." It is stated by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4th respondent that pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court on 16.02.2012,

the petitioner's representation was forwarded to the District Panchayat Officer and the petitioner's representation was disposed of on 08.03.2012 and the same was also communicated to the petitioner through registered post on 15.03.2012. In view of the submission that the representation of the writ petitioner was already disposed of, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI 3rd November, 2015 Vjl