APHC010409342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21071/2025 Between: 1. BONTHALA SUNIL KUMAR, S/O PAPI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF D.NO.8-53, PILUKALLU KATNAGALLU VILLAGE, PTM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2. BONTHALA PRASHANTH, S/O PEDDAPPADU @ PAPI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF PILUKALLU H/O KATNAGALLU VILLAGE, PTM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 3. BONTHALA SRIKANTH, S/O PEDDAPPADU @ PAPI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF PILUKALLU H/O KATNAGALLU VILLAGE, PTM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENTOF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMMAYYA DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTY. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLI, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PTM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2 ...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 topleased to issue a Writ, Order of Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not taking any action on the PGRS Grievance No.ANMY202412025457, dated 02- 12-2024 and PGRS Grievance No.ANMY202501203078, dated 20- 01- 2025 made for mutation of family partition and correction of entries in the revenue records with regard to properties admeasuring an extent of Ac.7.71 cents in Sy.No.l, Ac.14-60 cents in Sy.No.2, Ac.3.50 cents in Sy.No.3, Ac. 10.74 cents in Sy.No.4, Ac.2.71 cents in Sy.No.5, Ac.8.76 cents in Sy.No.7, Ac.203 cents in Sy.No.8, Ac.4.10 cents in Sy.No.9, Ac. 12.30 cents in Sy.No.ll, Ac.0.16 cents in Sy.No.l2, Ac. 10.25 cents in Sy.No.l3, Ac. 11.13 cents in Sy.No.l4, Ac.4.14 cents m Sy.No.l5, Ac.2.17 cents in Sy.No.l7, Ac.0.43 cents in Sy.No.lO, Ac. 1.85 cents in Sy.No.l2, Ac.3.11 cents in Sy.No.l6 and Sy.No.2.00 cents in Sy.No.l2 respectively, situated in Jagadamvaripalli village, Pedda Thippa Samudram Mandal, Annamayya District is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent to not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the above mentioned properties 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 pleased to direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners share of properties admeasuring an extent of Ac.7.71 cents in Sy.No.l, Ac. 14-60 cents in Sy.No.2, Ac.3.50 cents in Sy.No.3, Ac.10.74 cents in Sy.No.4, Ac.2.71 cents in Sy.No.5, Ac.8.76 cents in Sy.No.7, Ac.203 cents in Sy.No.8, Ac.4.10 cents in Sy.No.9, Ac. 12.30 cents in Sy.No.l 1, Ac.0.16 cents in Sy.No.l2, Ac. 10.25 cents in Sy.No.l3, Ac. 11.13 cents in Sy.No.l4, Ac.4.14 cents in Sy.No.15, Ac.2.17 cents in Sy.No.l7, Ac.0.43 cents in Sy.No.lO, Ac. 1.85 cents in Sy.No.l2, Ac.3.11 cents in Sy.No.l6 and Sy.No.2.00 cents in Sy.No.l2 respectively, situated in Jagadamvaripalli village, Pedda Thippa Samudram Mandal, Annamayya District, pending disposal of the above writ petition before the Hon’ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. VUTUPALLI RAJANNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 21071 of 2025 ORDER: Pithily this writ petition is filed on the grounds that a representation was made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the representation, 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 SCC 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 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.” 3. 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 4 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 petitioners representations dated 02.12.2024 and 20.01.2025 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 thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 11.08.2025 SNI 5 136 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.21071 of 2025 Date: 11.08.2025 SNI