IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY. PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR AND. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO: 102 OF 2019 Between: G Sarath Babu Sarath Reddy, S/o. G Venkata Reddy, Aged about 42 years, Occ Civil Contractor, R/o Plot No. C 4, Harshaa Classic, Near Amalodabhavi Schoo! Ashok Nagar, Eluru, West Godavari District -» PETITIONER AND 1 Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance ang Planning. Cental Secretariat, New Delhi 2 Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Municipal Administration Department, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Velagapudi Amaravathi 4 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, 5. The Secretary, Controller and Audit General, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur .. RESPONDENTS, Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed therewith. the High Court may be pleased to grant appropriate relief more particularly one in the nature of Wnt of Manaamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 here in diverting tne special funds which was sanctioned by the 1" and 2 respondent here in for the state development for the backward, areas in state of Andhra Pradesh is ‘llega! and voilative of Amticles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and against the constitution of India and against the rules made there under \ANO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Gwect the respondent 1 and 2 here in to conduct detailed enquiy in respect of diversion of the special funds in the state government by the respondents 3 to Shere in which were feleased by the respondents 1 and 2 herein JAN: 2 OF 2020 Petivon under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated {in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to ‘amend the WP (PIL) by adding the Paras 4(2) (a) para 4 (2) (k) along with the additional material papers in the above PIL for proper adjudication 1 for the Petition Count SRIP.NARAHARI BABU jont Nos.1 & 2: SRIN.HARINATH, Asst Sol.General Counsel for Respon 1 Nos.3 to Counsel for Responds SRI Y.N.VIVEKANANDA, GP attached to the Office of ADVOCATE GENERAL. The Court made the following: ORDER Scanned with CamScannerTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.102 of 2019 Order : (Per Hon'bie Sri Justice Rakesh Kumar) foceeding was taken up throut is Heard Sri P.Narahari Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sti Y.N.Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader attached to the office of leamed Advocate General 2, The present writ petition was filed in the month of May, 2019 as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by the petitioner with certain vague assertions with a Prayer to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.3/State of Andhra Pradesh in diverting the special funds, which were sanctioned by respondent Nos.1 and 2/Union of India for the state development for the backward areas in the State of Andhra Pradesh, as illegal. _ 3. In the wrt petition no specific assertion was made as to how and what fund was released by the Central Government and how it was diverted. In ormal course the said wrt petition was required to be rejected out rightly on this very ground. Besides this in para 7 of the writ petition a categoricat statement has been made that the petitioner had not made any Fepresentation to the Government, meaning thereby, that the petitioner before making prayer for issuance of Writ of Mandamus by way of PIL, has not demanded justice before the authority concemed. This is the condition Precedent for invoking Writ of Mandamus. The petitioner has not demanded any justice from the authority concerned. In the writ petition only vague Submissions were made, Thereafter, a Coordinate Bench of this Court ranted liberty to the petitioner to file amendment petition. Subsequently, one |nterlocutory application vido 1.A.No.1 of 2020 was filed for amendment, which was itself defective and the same was dismissed on 24.02.2020. While Scanned with CamScannerdismi i ‘missing |.A.No.1 of 2020, liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a fresh oo . pplication along with relevant documents, The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that after order, dated 24.02.2020, the petitioner has filed another interlocutory application vide IA.No.2 of 2020, in which he made it lear to amend the writ petition by adding para 4(2) to para 4 (2) (k). In Support of so called amendment petition, an affidavit has also been filed. Even after going through the amendment petitions, its clear that no assertion has been made regarding approaching the authority concerned for demanding justice and directly this writ petition was filed. Considering the fact that the writ petition was filed with vague statements and also without approaching the authority concerned, we are of the opinion that such writ Petition even as PIL may not be entertained. Hence, the Writ Petition (PIL) stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, any, pending shall stand closed. SDI- A. SURYAPRAKASH RAO. \ DEPUTY REGISTRAR iS ITRUE COPYI/ SECTION OFFICER To, : SRI P. NARAHARI BABU, Advocate [OPUC] ok Se €e i SRI N. HARINATH, Asst.Sol.Genevral [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Advocate General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4, Two C.D. Copies. MRC ae Scanned with CamScannerHIGH COURT DATED: 16/06/2020 ORDER WP(PIL).No.102 of 2019 DISMISSING THE WP (PIL) WITHOUT CosTS \e Flee Scanned with CamScanner