APHC010348632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHT DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22426/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK GHOUSE MOHIDDIN, S/O. MD. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC.CULTIVATION, 2. SHAIK RAHAMATHULLA, S/O. LATE HANEEF SAAB, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC. SENIOR CITIZEN, 3. SHAIK MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O. S/P. MD. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, 4. SHAIK SHAFIULLA, S/O. MD. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, 5. SHAIK ABDUL KLIADER, S/O. MD. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, (ALL PETITIONERS ARE RESIDENTS AT D.NO.2/118, SIRCAR BAVI STREET, GURRAMKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P.) ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTI, A.P. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTI, A.P. 2 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAYACHOTI, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, GURRAMKONDA MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the in action of the respondents particularly the 5th respondent Tahsildar not considering the petitioners representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023, 20.01.2024 for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the agricultural lands situated in Sy.No.522/1 to an extent of Ac.3-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/3 to an extent of Ac.l-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/4 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/5 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/6 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents and in Sy.No.522/8 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents situated at Gurramkonda Village, Gurramkonda Mandal, Annamayya District which are in absolute possession and enjoyment of the petitioners since several decades is being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and also against to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 197land rules made thereunder and consequently direct the 5th respondent to consider the petitioners representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023, 20.01.2024 for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the petitioners respective extents and pass IA 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 5th respondent to consider the petitioners’ representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023, 20.01.2024 for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the petitioners respective extents and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SURYAM GANNAVARAPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 22426 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the 5th respondent Tahsildar not considering the petitioners representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023, 20.01.2024 for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the agricultural lands situated in Sy.No.522/1 to an extent of Ac.3-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/3 to an extent of Ac.l-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/4 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/5 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents, in Sy.No.522/6 to an extent of Ac. 1-04 Cents and in Sy.No.522/8 to an extent of Ac.1-04 Cents situated at Gurramkonda Village, Gurramkonda Mandal, Annamayya District which are in absolute possession and enjoyment of the petitioners since several decades is being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and also against to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and rules made thereunder and consequently direct the 5th respondent to consider the petitioners representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023, 20.01.2024 for issuance of Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds to the petitioners respective extents and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Pithily this writ petition is filed on the ground that representations were made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the representations, as such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. 3. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCC 613 held that: Dispose of the representation’ mantra is increasingly permeating the judicial process in the High Courts and the 4 Tribunals. Such orders may make for a quick or 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. 4. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a Court to authorities, before directing "consideration" of a claim or representation should examine whether the claim or representation is with reference to a "live" issue or whether it is with reference to a "dead" or "stale" issue. If it is with reference 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 Court does not expressly say so, that would be the legal position and effect." 5. Disposal 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 service to the cause of justice. 6. However the respondents are directed that the petitioners’ representations dated 31.07.2007, 03.07.2023 and 20.01.2024 must be considered by the respondents, examined thoroughly, issue orders 5 accordingly, and communicate the decision given to the petitioners. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within eight weeks from the date the order is received. 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 28.08.2025 SPP 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:22426 of 2025 Date : 28.08.2025 SPP