::1:: APHC010418882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.2 of 2025 IN/AND WRIT PETITION NO: 21616/2025 Between: 1. YELAMANCHIL MAHARANI SRILAKSHMI CHAYADEVI, AGED 26 YEARS, D/O. Y. PEDABABU (LATE), REP, BY HER GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, BHUVANESWARI DEVI, R/O. ASHOK NAGAR, ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. AP STATE GOVT EMPLOYEES MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT) A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRIT. 2. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, GAVARAVARAM, SANIVARAPUPET ROAD, ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE ::2:: COMPOUND, ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PEDAPADU (M) ELURU. ELURU DISTRICT. 5. SATYAVOLU GRAM PANCHYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SATYAVOLU (V), PEDAPADU (M), ELURU DISTRICT 6. ROUTHU APPA RAO, , S/O. CHENCHU NAIDU, SATYAVOLU (V), PEDAPADU (M), ELURU DISTRICT. 7. LAVETI RANGAMANI, W/O. NARAYANA BABU (LATE), SATYAVOLU (V), PEDAPADU (M), ELURU DISTRICT. 8. MUDEDIA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O . VASUDEVA RAO, R/O.SATYAVOLU (V), PEDAPADU (M), ELURU 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 toPleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or orders or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in not permitting to carry fish feed by tractor/Bullock cart to go through Bandia daari/Cart track to the petitioner's fish tank as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of Principles of Natural Justice and clear violation of Articlesl4,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the Respondents to carry fish feed by tractor/Bullock cart to the petitioner's fish tank through Bandia daari/ cart track and pass IA 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 to consider and initiate necessary action on petitioner representation dated:4/9/2025 to protect Bandla ::3:: daari/BandIa gadi/cart track, to permit me to transport fish feed etc., by tractor/bullocks cart by preventing the encroachments thereon pending disposal of main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B P RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE ::4:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.2 of 2025 IN/AND W.P.No.21616 of 2025 This Court made the following ORDER: The Instant Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the Petitioners for the following relief: “..to issue an appropriate Writ order or orders or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in not permitting to carry fish feed by tractor/Bullock cart to go through Bandla daari/Cart track to the petitioners fish tank as highly illegal arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of Principles of Natural Justice and clear violation of Articles l4, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the Respondents to carry fish feed by tractor/Bullock cart to the petitioners fish tank through Bandla daari/ cart track and pass..” 2. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners filed I.A.No.2 of 2025 requesting this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 04.09.2025 of the Petitioner. ::5:: 3. Learned Government Pleader for Gram Panhayat and learned Standing counsel for Gram Panhayat readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 04.09.2025, if any pending with the authorities. 4. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioners himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 04.09.2025, this Court find no other alternative except to issue such direction. 1 2019 (8) SCALE 544 ::6:: 5. In the result, I.A.No.2 of 2025 and Writ Petition are disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation dated 04.09.2025 of the Petitioners within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and other stakeholders if any. No costs. Consequently, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Dt: 22.09.2025 krk ::7:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA I.A.No.2 of 2025 IN/AND W.P.No.21616 of 2025 DT: 22.09.2025 krk 133