::1:: APHC010492402012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3936/2012 Between: Kanety Mohana Rao ...PETITIONER AND Union Of India Rep By Its Secretary and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V L N SARMA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3936 of 2012 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the Petitioner for the following relief: “..to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent in not paying the petitioner the pensionary benefits as revised from time to time with interest at such rate as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit...” 2. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representations dated 19.04.2011 and 15.06.2011 of the Petitioner. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondents readily agreed to dispose of the representations of the petitioner dated 19.04.2011 and 15.06.2011, if any pending with the authorities. 4. In view of the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for Respondents, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction ::3:: be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representations 19.04.2011 and 15.06.2011, this Court find no other alternative except to issue such direction. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representations 19.04.2011 and 15.06.2011 of the Petitioner within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by passing a speaking order. No costs. Consequently, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA,J Dt: 03.01.2025 krk 1 2019 (8) SCALE 544 ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3936 of 2012 03.01.2025 krk