► APHC010246742025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD.ES^ ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdi^ti^ LI lO ^ . ■' \ WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAYOF AUGU^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 12536 OF 2025 r- / i RAO Between: Yelamanchili Bhuvaneswari Devi, Female W/o. Y. Pedababu, R/0.D.N0.24A-5-9, Ashok Nagar, Eluru. Eluru District. aged 62 years, Occ: House wife ...PETITIONER AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government (Revenue Department), A.P. Secretariat, Guntur District.. 2. The District Collector, Eluru, Eluru District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collector Office District. 4. The Tahsiidar, Pedapadu(M), Pedapadu, Eluru District. Velagapudi, Amaravathi. compound, Eluru, Eluru ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue may be more particularly in action of Respondents in not and 29-1-2025 and lands of R.S.No.41 and R.S.N0.41/2B situated in Satyavolu (V), Pedapadu (M), Eluru District an appropriate Writ, order or direction the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the considering the Representations dated 1-7-2024 not restore drain water channel to Agricultural as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of Principles of Natural Justice and clear violation of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the Respondents to consider the Petitioners representations dated 1-7- 2024 and 29-1-2025 and to restore drain water channel to the Agricultural lands of R.S.No.41 & 41/2B. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the Respondents to consider Representations dated; 1-7-2024 and 29-1-2025 and to pass appropriate orders and pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B. P. RAJU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: r IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE APHC010246742025 [3330] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 12536/2025 Between; I.YELAMANCHILI BHUVANESWARI DEVI,, FEMALE, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, W/0. Y. PEDABABU, ASHOK NAGAR, ELURU. ELURU R/0.D.N0.24A-5-9, DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT (REVENUE SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT), A.P. AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTOR OFFICE COMPOUND, ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleasedto issue an appropriate \ 2 RR,J W.P.NO.1253bOF2025 \ Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in not considering the Representations dated 1-7-2024 and 29-1-2025 not restore drain water channel to Agricultural lands of R.S.No.41 and Pedapadu (M), Eluru District as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of Principles of Natural Justice and clear violation of Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the Respondents to consider the Petitioners representations dated 1-7- 2024 and 29-1-2025 and to restore drain water channel to the Agricultural lands of R.S.No.41 and 41/2B and to pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondents to consider Representations dated: 1-7-2024 and 29-1-2025 and to pass appropriate orders and pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BP RAJU Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following; and R.S.NO.41/2B situated in Satyavolu (V), praying that in the W.P.NO.l/'bib Uh ZU/b ORDER: Pithily this writ petition is filed on the grounds that a representations dated 01.07.2024 and 29.01.2025 was made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the representation, such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. 2. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCC 613 held that: as Dispose of the representation’ mantra is increasingly permeating the judicial process in the High Courts and the Tribunals. Such orders may make for a quick easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do not service to the cause of justice. The litigant is back again before the Court, as this case shows, having incurred attendant costs and suffered delays of the legal process. This would have been obviated by calling for a counter in the first instance, thereby resulting in finality to the dispute. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a Court to claim or or 3. before directing "consideration" of a whether the claim or authorities. \ examine representation should representation is with reference to a with reference to a "dead" or "stale" issue. If it is with reference \ live" issue or whether it is to a "dead" or "stale" issue or dispute, the Court/tribunal should put an end to the matter and should not direct consideration or reconsideration. If the Court to tribunal deciding to direct "consideration" without itself examining the merits, it should make it clear that such consideration will be without prejudice to any contention relating to limitation or delay and laches. Even if the 4 W.P.N0.12536 0F2( court does not expressly say so, that would be the legal position and effect." 4. Disppsal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders directing consideration of representation though result in quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but such orders do more disservice than Justice. service to the cause of 5. However, the respondent is directed that the petitioner's must be issue given to the process will be representations dated 01.07.2024 and 29.01.2025 considered by the respondents, examined thoroughly, i orders accordingly, and communicate the decision petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire completed within six weeks from the date the order is received. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if this Writ Petition shall stand closed. any pending in Sd/- V.DIWAKAR DEPUTY eeGjSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary to Government (Revenue Department), State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Eluru, Eluru District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collector Office compound, Eluru, Eluru District. 4. The Tahsildar, Pedapadu(M), Pedapadu, Eluru District. 5. One CC to Sri B. P. Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:13/08/2025 ORDER WP No. 12536 OF 2025 1 / / / DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS