APHC010186512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9959/2025 Between: Chakala Ganga Ratna ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9959/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not mutating the name of the petitioner in revenue record vide application No.MUT250214021928, dated 14.02.2025 for issuance of pattadar pass books-cum-title deeds for the agricultural lands in Sy.No.496-2 for an extent of Ac.3.64 cents, Sy.No.496-2 for an extent of Ac.2.15 cents, sy.No.486-3 for an extent of Ac.0.64 ½ cents, Sy.No.487-2 for an extent of Ac.1.04 ½ cents, Sy.No.499-2 for an extent of Ac.1.28 cents, total extent of Ac.8.76 cents in Mamillakunta village, K.Locharla Mandal, Ananthapur District (Present Sri Satya Sai District) as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue the pattadar pass book and title deed by mutating the petitioner’s name in the revenue records and pass such other order.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant 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 dispose of the application dated 14.02.2025 submitted by the petitioner. 3 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the application, if any pending with the respondents. 5. In view of the submission of the learned Assistant 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 application dated 14.02.2025, this Court finds 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 application dated 14.02.2025 filed by the petitioner, after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within a period of two(2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. 1 2019 (8) SCALE 544 4 As a sequel miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 21.04.2025 ssjj 5 102 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 9959 of 2025 21.04.2025 ssjj