APHC010156272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8249/2025 Between: Bagadi Satyavathi and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P SAI SURYA TEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: O R D E R: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following relief: “to issue a writ, direction or order, particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in placing the land admeasuring Ac. 0.54 cents in Survey No. 164/2 of Duppala Valasaa Revenue Village, Thotapalem Gram Panchayat, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District belonging to the petitioners in the prohibited list under 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 vide Notification No. RC No. 823/2014/El dated 10-04-2016 as the is without jurisdiction, contrary to law, illegal and against principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents to remove the land admeasuring Ac.0.54 cents in Survey No. 164/2 of Duppala Valasaa Revenue Village, Thotapalem Gram Panchayat, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District same from the prohibited list under Sec 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 by considering the representation of the petitioners dated 30-01-2025”” 2. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 30.01.2025. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 30.01.2025, if any pending with the authorities. 4. In view of the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, I 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 no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioners himself requested to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 30.01.2025, with a liberty to make representation under the Right to Information Act for obtaining necessary information/documents, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 30.01.2025 made by the petitioners, in accordance with law, within four (04) months from today. No costs. 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:01.04.2025 SP 1 2019 (8) SCALE 544 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8249/2025 Date:01.04.2025 W SP