APHC010410422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ■% lo: THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST\o TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21359 OF 2025 Between: Malempati Chamundeswari, W/o. Govardhana Rao, aged 55 years, R/o. D.No.32-8-6, Alapati Nagar, 0pp. Sultanabad, Tenali, 522202. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principle Secretary For Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principle Secretary For Home, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principle Secretary For Registration and Stamps , Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 4. Sub-Registrar, Sub Registrar House, Ibrahimpatnam, NTR District (Krishna) 5. The Station House Officer, Ibrahimpatnam P.S., NTR District (Krishna). 6. Karanam Anitha, W/o. Late Raghavaih, aged about 45 years, R/o. D.No. 4-32/1, Eelaprolu village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, NTR Dist 521228. 7. Karanam Rangaiah, s/o Ramaiah, aged about 63 years, Sarpanch of Eelaprolu r/o Eelaprolu Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, NTR District 8. Karanam Chiranjeevi, s/o Ramaiah, 50 years, Eelaprolu village Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, NTR Krishna District. ...Respondents 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 issue a direction or order or a writ, more particularly a writ of Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the Respondent no.4 in not considering the representation submitted by the Petitioner dated 20-03-2025 requesting not to register any fictious partition deeds in favour of Respondent no.6 and her minor children as illegal and arbitrary and futher the Respondent No.3 and 4 to cancel the illegal Partition document no. 3353/2025 dated 02-06-2025 of SRO, Ibrahimpatnam and further direct the inaction of the Respondent no.5 in failing to maintain status quo over the schedule premises despite a complaint given by the Petitioner that a Civil Suit vide O.S.No 975/2025 on the file of 1st Addl. Junior Civil Judge at Vijayawada is pending and the Respondent No.5 allowed the Respondent No.6 to proceed with the construction in the schedule premises, is illegal and arbitrary and violation of article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. 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 Respondent No.5 to stop the illegal construction activity that is high handedly and arbitrarily taken up by the Respondent No. 6 to 8 in the schedule property belonging to the Petitioner till pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHANU PRASAD CHUKKAPALLI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE -v f I Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 & 4: GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 to 8: —- The Court made the following order; APHC010410422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 01^:0 0S5 [3330] THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21359/2025 Between: 1.MALEMPATI CHAMUNDESWARI,, W/0. GOVARDHANA RAO, AGED 55 YEARS R/0. D.NO.32-8-6, ALAPATI NAGAR, OPP. SULTANABAD,TENALI, 522202. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, .REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY FOR REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY FOR HOME, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 3.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 4.SUBREGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR IBRAHIMPATNAM, NTR DISTRICT (KRISHNA) 5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, IBRAHIMPATNAM P.S., NTR DISTRICT (KRISHNA). 6.KARANAM ANITHA, W/0. LATE RAGHAVAIH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/0. D.NO. 4-32/1, EELAPROLU VILLAGE, IBRAHIMPATNAMMANDAL, NTR DIST 521228. 7.KARANAM RANGAIAH, S/0 RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, SARPANCH OF EELAPROLU R/O EELAPROLU VILLAGE, IBRAHIMPATNAM MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT 8.KARANAM CHIRANJEEVI, S/0 RAMAIAH, 50 YEARS, EELAPROLU VILLAGE IBRAHIMPATNAM MANDAL, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT. HOUSE, ...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 issue a direction or order or a writ, more particularly a writ of Mandanmus by declaring the inaction of the Respondent no.4 in not considering the representation submitted by the Petitioner dated 20-3-2025 requesting not to register any fictions partition deeds in favour of Respondent no.6 and her minor children 2 as illegal and arbitrary and futher the Respondent No.3 and 4 to cancel the illegal Partition document no. 3353/2025 dated 2-6-2025 of SRO, Ibrahimpatnam and further direct the inaction of the Respondent no.5 in failing to maintain status quo over the schedule premises despite a complaint given by the Petitoner that a Civil Suit vide O.S.No 975/2025 on the file of 1st Addl. Junior Civil Judge at Vijayawada is pending and the Respondent No.5 allowed the Respondent No.6 to proceed with the construction in the schedule premisses, is illegal and arbitrary and violation of article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India 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 pleased to direct the Respondent No.5 to stop the illegal construction activity that is high handedly and arbirarily taken up by the Respondent No. 6 to 8 in the schedule property belonging to the Petitioner till pending disposal of the above writ petiton and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BHANU PRASAD CHUKKAPALLI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS fr THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.21359 of 2025 ORDER:- Pithily this writ petition is filed on the grounds that representation dated 20.03.2025 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. The Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh^ held as follows: “...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 (2019) 15 see 613 4 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 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 20.03.2025 be considered by examining thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, 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. SDI- SHAIK WIOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT R]^ ‘ ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat. Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. 2. The Principal Secretary, Home Dept., Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Registration and Stamps, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 4. The Sub-Registrar, Sub Registrar House, Ibrahimpatnam, NTR District (Krishna) 5. The Station House Officer, Ibrahimpatnam P.S., NTR District (Krishna). 6. One CC to Sri Bhanu Prasad Chukkapalli, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CCs to GP for Registration and Stamps, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 10. Two CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:14/08/2025 I 0 t SEP 2fl?5 i Current Section . , ORDER WP NO. 21359 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS