APHC010140052025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 7349/2025 Between: G Raju ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. THOTA RAMAKOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:7349/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “ to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring action of the respondent in not mutating the name of petitioner in revenue record including WEB Land to the land admeasuring Ac.4-82 cents in Survey No.RS 594 of Jujjuru village, Veerulapadu Mandal, NTR District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and violative of principles of natural Justice and pass such other order or orders….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. 3. 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 consider and dispose of the representation dated 03.02.2025 submitted by the petitioner 4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation dated 03.02.2025 pending with the authorities, within a reasonable time. 5. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction 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 not serve to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 03.02.2025, this Court find no other alternative except to issue such direction. 6. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 03.02.2025, after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. _______________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 24.03.2025 BSP 1 2004 (1) SCC 769 13 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.7349 of 2025 24.03.2025 BSP