.r i APHC010379602025 ■'N THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST JS TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE V PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA WRIT PETITION NO: nc 0(SH m PRADESH RAJASEKHAR RAO Between: Peddiveeti Narasimhulu, S/o Kadiraiah, R/o Pedda Harijanawada, District. Aged 25 years, Occ; Social Service Veeraballi Village and Mandal, Annamayya ...PETITIONER AND Rep. by its PrI. Secretary to Govt, f, Guntur. Transport Department. Rep. by its Vice PNBS, Vijaywada. Annamayya District, at Rayachoti. Annamayya District, rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Transport Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi 2. Andhra Pradesh State Road Chairman and Managing Director 3. Depot Manager, Veeraballe Depot 4. District Collector, Annamayya District 5. Tahsildar, Veeraballi Mandal 6. Veeraballi Gram Panchayat, Veeraballi, Annamayya District. 7. J. Bhaskar, S/o Ranganna. Mandal, Annamayya District Aged Major R/o Veeraballi Village and ...respondents praying that in the in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court Petition under Article 226 circumstances stated i of the Constitution of India may be 1 pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of respondents 2 to 6 on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025 and 09.06.2025 to stop the illegal construction of the 7'" respondent in 3'“ respondent premises in survey No.547-2 of Veeraballi Village, Veeraballi Mandal, Annamayya District 12.05.2025, 23.05.2025 as illegal, irregular, irrational, and violtive of of India and Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution consequently direct the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 to act 05.05.2025,12.05.2025, beton^to the 1st respondent in survey No. 547-2 in Veeraballi village and Mandal, Annamayya District upon the representation of the petitioner dated 23.05.2025 and 09.06.2025 and protect the land lA NO: 1 OF JCiOR Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit flied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased ot direct the respondent Nos; 4 to 6 to act praying that in the circumstances stated upon the representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025; protect the land belongs to the Veeraballi village and Mandal, above writ petition. 12.05.2025, 23.05.2025 and 09.06.2025 and 1 respondent in survey No: 547-2 in Annamayya District, pending disposal of the Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI M. SOLOMON Counsel for the Respondent No.1;GP FOR TRANSPORT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 RAJU & 3: SRI A. RAMA RAO, SC FOR APSRTC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 6: SRI M. SUDHIR, SC FOR ZPP, MPP & gram PANCHAYAT Counsel for the Respondent No.7;- The Court made the following order: APHC010379602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] 0S??S MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 19951/2025 THE Between; 1 PEDDIVEETI NARASIMHULU, S/O KADIRAIAH AGED 25 YEARS, PEDDA HARIJANAWADA, R/0 SOCIAL SERVICE, VILLAGE AND MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. OCC. VEERABALLI ...PETITIONER AND REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY TO department, ESTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH transport SECRETARIAT GOVT., VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR. 2.ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, by its vice chairman and managing director, pnbs, VIJAYWADA. 3.DEPOT MANAGER, VEERABALLE DEPOT, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4.DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTl. VEERABALLI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 5.TAHSILDAR, 6.VEERABALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, VEERABALLI, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 7.J BHASKAR, S/O RANGANNA, AGED MAJOR R/0 VEERABALLI VILLAGE AND MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S); fr ■%'x. 2 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 l.._ of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of respondents representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025,12.05.2025 and 09.06.2025 to stop the illegal construction of the 7 respondent in 3rd respondent premises in survey No.547-2 of Veeraballi Village, Veeraballl todal, Annamayya District, as illegal, irregular, irrational, and violtive of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India respondent Nos. 4 to 6 to act upon the 05.05.2025,12.05.2025, one in the nature 2 to 6 on the 23.05.2025 and consequently direct the representation of the petitioner dated 23.05.2025 and 09.06.2025 and protect the land belongs to the 1st respondent in survey No. 547-2 in Veeraballi village and Mandal, Annamayya District and pass lA NO: 1 OF 202.5 Pew,on 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 direct the respondent Nos:4 to 6 to act upon the representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025; 12.05.2025. 23.05.2025 protect the land belongs to the 1st respondent Veeraballi village and Mandal, Annamayya District, above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M SOLOMONRAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.GP FOR TRANSPORT and 09.06.2025 and in survey No; 547-2 in pending disposal of the 4 3 ! Hh HONOURABLE SRi JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO, 19951 of 2025 ORDER: Pithily this writ petition is filed on the grounds that the 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. 2. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCO 613 held that; “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 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 shov\/s, 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 authorities, before 3. directing "consideration" of a claim or representations should examine whether the claim or representations 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 reconsideratio n. 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. Disposal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders directing consideration of representations though result cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but such disservice than service to the cause of justice. 4. in quick or easy disposal of orders do more 5. However, the respondents are directed representations dated 05.05.2025, 12.05.2025, 23.05.2025 must be considered by the respondents accordingly, and communicate the decision without saying that the entire the date of the order is received. that the petitioner's and 09.06.2025 examined thoroughly, issue orders given to the petitioner. It goes process will be completed within six weeks from 6. 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. Sd/-A.VIJAYABABU assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// sectio^^o^ficer To 1. The PrI. Secretary to Govt., Transport Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur. 2. The Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Department, PNBS, Vijaywada. 3. The Depot Manager, Veeraballe Depot, Annamayya District. 4. The District Collector, Annamayya District at Rayachoti. 5. The Tahsildar, Veeraballi Mandal, Annamayya District. 4^ 6. The Panchayat Secretary, Veeraballi Gram Panchayat, Veeraballi, Annamayya District. 7. One CC to Sri M. Solomon Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri A. Rama Rao, SC for APSRTC[OPUC] 9. One CC to Sri M. Sudhir, SC for ZPP, MPP & Gram Panchayat[OPUC] 10. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT 11. Two CCs to GP for Transport, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 12. Two CD Copies. ssb high court PATED;1 1/08/2025 ORDER WPNo.19951 OF 2025 /# ^ 0 'I SEP 2025 ^^^^sCyfrent disposing of the W.P. WITHOUT COSTS