APHC010401912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESK*!!S AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY. THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 20606 OF 2025 Between: Nokku Sundara Rao. S/o. Samual, age 56 years, D.No.7-54, Mamilladoddi Village, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District -533 434. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its. Principal Secretary Revenue Department Secretariat Building, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Kakinada, Kakinada District. 3. Tahsildar, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District. 4. The Inspector of Police, Samalkot circle, Kakinada District. 5. Bathina Nagesh, Age 45 yrs, S/o.Suribabu SamalkotMandal, KakinadaDistrict-533 434. Mamilladoddi village. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed 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 a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of Respondents 2 and 3 in failing to conduct a proper enquiry into the 15.05.2025 and 30.07.2025, regarding the petitioner's assigned house site, admeasuring IVa cents, situated at House No. 7-72, in Survey No. 7/1 of Mamilladoddi Village, Venkata Krishnapuram, Samalkot Mandal, and bounded by: North - Chukka Jatlayya, East - Road, petitioner's representations dated grievance relating to the V,. South - Road, West - Property belonging to Badda Mahalakshmi, within the jurisdiction of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and a gross abuse of power and consequently direct Respondents 2 and 3 to take immediate and appropriate steps pursuant to the petitioner’s representation dated 30.07.2025, to protect the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the said assigned house site. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed 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 2 and 3 to take immediate and appropriate steps on the petition of the petitioner dated 30.07.2025 to protect the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the said assigned house site house site land from encroachment and illegal house construction by the 5' respondent, in respect of an extent of r/2 cents of assigned patta land, granted as a house site patta in Survey Nos. 7/1 in Mamilladoddi Village, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District, pending disposal Petition. of the main Writ Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI INAPURAPU SURYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.5: -- The Court made the following order: A . APHC010401912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B5B Bv.'s [3330] ■11 WEDNESDAY. THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 20606/2025 Between: 1.NOKKU SUNDARA RAO. S/0. SAMUAL. AGE 56 YEARS. D.NO.7-54. MAMILLADODDI VILLAGE. SAMALKOT MANDAL. KAKINADA DISTRICT -533 434. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP. BY ITS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDING. AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. KAKINADA. KAKINADA DISTRICT. 3.TAHSILDAR. SAMALKOT MANDAL. KAKINADA DISTRICT. 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE. SAMALKOT CIRCLE. KAKINADA DISTRICT. 5.BATHINA NAGESH. AGE 45 YRS. S/O.SURIBABU MAMILLADODDI VILLAGE. SAMALKOT MANDAL. KAKINADA DISTRICT -533 434. ...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 a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of Respondents 2 and 3 in failing to conduct a proper enquiry into the petitioner's representations dated 15.05.2025 and 30.07.2025. regarding the grievance relating to the petitioner's assigned house site, admeasuring iy2 cents, situated at House No.7-72, in Survey No.7/1 of Mamilladoddi Village, Venkata Krishnapuram, Samalkot Mandal, and bounded by North - Chukka Jatlayya, East - Road, South - Road, West - Property belonging to Badda Mahalakshmi, within the jurisdiction of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and a gross abuse of power and consequently direct Respondents 2 and 3 to take 2 immediate and appropriate steps pursuant to the petitioner’s protect the petitioner's representation dated 30.07.2025 possession and enjoyment of the said assigned house site, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. to 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 2 and 3 to take immediate and appropriate steps on the petition of the petitioner dated 30.07.2025 to protect the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the said assigned house site house site land from encroachment and illegal house construction by the 5th respondent, in respect of an extent of 1 '/a cents of assigned patta land, granted as a house site patta in Survey Nos. 7/1 in Mamilladoddi Village, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.INAPURAPU SURYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ! THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 20606 of 2025 ORDER: Pithily this writ petition is filed on the ground that representations, dated 15.05.2025 and 30.07.2025 were made to the authorities, but they were 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. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCO 613 held that: 2. "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 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 authorities. 3. before directing "consideration" of a claim or representation should examine whether the claim or representation is with reference to a dead" or "stale" issue. live" issue or whether it is with reference to a stale" issue or dispute, the If it is with reference to a "dead" or Court/Tribunal should put an end to the matter and should not direct consideration or reconsideration. If the Court to tribunal deciding to a 4 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. 4. 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. 5. However, the respondents are directed that the petitioner's representation, dated 30.07.2025 must be considered by the respondents, examined thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision given to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within six weeks from the date of the order is received. 6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANTCREGiSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary Pradesh, Secretariat Building, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Kakinada, Kakinada District. 3. The Tahsildar, Samalkot Mandal, Kakinada District. Revenue Department, State of Andhra 4. The Inspector of Police, Samalkot circle, Kakinada District. 5. One CC to SRI. INAPURAPU SURYANARAYANA Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies PRK . HIGH COURT DATED:06/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 20606 OF 2025 Si 0^1 SEP 2025 jg frentSectioiiX^5^ DISPOSING OF THE WP, WITHOUT COSTS