APHC010410172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21277 of 2025 Between: 1. MOKARA SIMMAPPA, W/O. LATE MOKARA APPARAO AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, LANDLESS POOR PERSON, R/O. 1-1, DAKAMARRI (V), BHEEMILIPATNAM, VISHAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, A.P SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI CAPITAL CITY, VELAGAPUDI POST, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISHAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISHAKHAPATNAM. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VISHAKAPATNAM. 4. TAHSILDAR, BHEEMILIPATNAM MANDAL, BHEEMILI, VISHAKHAPATNAM 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 to issue an order or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other suitable writ declaring the inaction of the Respondents in not considering my claim for grant of assignment of land in Sy.No.356 of Dokumarri Village, Bhemilipatnam Mandal to an extent of Ac.1.15 cents as arbitrary violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and Board Standing Orders and as per the policy of the Government and consequently direct the respondents to grant the same at the earliest together with costs. 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M. PITCHAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Pithily, this Writ Petition is filed on the grounds that representation dated 02.08.2024 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 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 contention 4 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 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.08.2024, examine the same thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be 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 thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 20.08.2025 siva 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.21277 of 2025 Date: 20.08.2025 siva