Vi hi APHC010410632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0?? MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST _ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 20994 OF 2025 Between: Singam Reddy Sreenivasula Reddy, S/o. Venkata Subba Reddy, aged about 45 years, R/o. D.No.9/89, Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 3. The Joint Collector, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 5. The Tahsildar, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 6. The Grampanchayat, Rep. by its Secretary, Thollaganganapalli Village Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. Guntur District, Andhra ...Respondents praying that in the may be Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to pass an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with peaceful possession and trying to dispossess the petitioner more particularly respondent no. 5 without considering representation , dated 30.07.2025 made by the petitioner pursuant to notice, Index number B/444/2025 dated 19.07.2025 in regard to an extent of Ac.3.85 cents in Sy.No.88, 16/2, 89/5B, 15/5 and 16/1 in Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District as illegal and arbitrary and apart from being violation fundamental rights guaranteed to us under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly respondent no. 5 to not interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment to an extent of Ac.3.85 cents in Sy.No.88, 16/2, 89/5B, 15/5 and 16/rin Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. of the lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi 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 particularly respondent no.5 to consider the explanation, dated:30.07.2025. lA NO: 2 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 particularly respondent no.5 to not interfere with the petitioner's peaceful- possession and enjoyment. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI THANJAVURU VENKATA SUMAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: APHC010410632025 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: 20994/2025 Between; 1.SINGAM REDDY SREENIVASULA REDDY, S/0. VENKATA SUBBA R/0. D.NO.9/89, VALLUR MANDAL, YSR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS THOLLAGANGANAPALLI VILLAGE, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KADAPA,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KADAPA,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADAPA,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 5.THE TAHSILDAR, , VALLUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 6.THE GRAMPANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THOLLAGANGANAPALLI VILLAGE,VALLUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA 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 pass an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of 2 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering with peaceful possession and trying to dispossess the petitioner particularly respondent no. 5 without considering representation , dated 30.07.2025 made by the petitioner pursuant to notice, Index number B/444/2025, dated 19.07.2025 in regard to an extent of Ac.3.85 cents in Sy.No.88, 16/2, 89/5B, 15/5 and 16/1 in Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District as illegal and arbitrary and apart from being fundamental rights guaranteed to us under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents particularly respondent no. 5 to not interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment to an extent of Ac.3.85 cents in Sy.No.88, 16/2, 89/5B, 15/5 and 16/1 in Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and to pass 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 particularly respondent no.5 to not interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment and pass lA NO: 2 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 particularly respondent explanation ,dated:30.07.2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .THANJAVURU VENKATA SUMAN Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE violation of the no.5 to consider the 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 20994 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. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs 2. 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 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 not expressly say so, that would be the legal or delay and laches. Even if the Court does 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 representation dated 30.07.2025 examined thoroughly, issue orders given to the petitioner. It goes without completed within six weeks from the date of the respondents are directed that the petitioner's must be considered by the respondents. accordingly, and communicate the decision saying that the entire process will be order is received. 6. With the above observation disposal of the representation petitioner from the subject land. There shall be the Writ Petition is disposed of. Till the the respondent authority shall not evict the no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand Sd/- NNAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR closed. //TRUE COPY// // ^ SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District Pradesh. 2. The District Cpilector, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 3. The Joint Collector, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. State of Andhra , Andhra r 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 5-. The Tahsildar, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 6. The Secretary, Grampanchayat, Thollaganganapalli Village, Vallur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 7. One CC to Sri Thanjavuru Venkata Suman, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies RAM HIGH COURT DATED:11/08/2025 ORDER WP.NO. 20994 OF 2025 S( 12 SEP 2025 1 Co wnntSKtlga^^ DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS