§ s APHC010422402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22002 OF 2025 Between: Varre Srinivas, S/o Ramarao, aged about 50 years, R/o 1-76, Alluru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal, Eluru District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, A.P.Secretariat,Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Eluru District, Eluru. 3. The Tahsildar, Mudinepalli Mandal. Mudinepalli, Eluru District. 4. The Mandal Surveyor, Mudinepalli Mandal, Eluru District. 5. The Village Surveyor, Alluru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal, Eluru 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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent considering the representation dated 09.12.2024 of the petitioner and taking further action on the notice dated 28.12.2024 , U/s 23 of APS and B Act 1923, issued by the respondent is as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law , violation of principles of natural justice and violation of provisions of Article not not 14, 21 and 300(A) of Constitution of India and further direct the to consider the Sthrepresentation of the petitioner dated 09.12.2024 further action on the notice dated 28.12.2025 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 to consider the 09.12.2024 to the 2nd respondent and take further action 28.12.2025 of the 5th respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T VV KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: respondents and take 5th respondent forth with. representation of the petitioner dated on the notice dated '■i J^' APHC010422402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) L> [3330] ■: SATURDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO; 22002 of 2025 Between; 1.VARRE SRINIVAS, S/0 RAMARAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/0 1- 76, ALLURU VILLAGE, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR SECRETARY A.P.SECRETARlAT,VELAGAPUDI, DISTRICT. REVENUE AMARAVATHI, 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, , ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU. 3.THE TAHSILDAR, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, MUDINEPALLI, ELURU DISTRICT. . 4.THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 5.THE VILLAGE SURVEYOR, ALLURU VILLAGE, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, 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 to pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent not considering the representation dated 09.12.2024 of the petitioner and not taking further action on the notice dated 28.12.2024 , U/s 23 of APS and B Act 1923, issued by the respondent is as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law violation of principles of natural justice and violation of 14, 21 and 300(A) of Constitution of India and further ^ to consider the Sthrepresentation of the petitioner dated further action on the notice dated 28.12.2025 of the and 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 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.12.2024 to the 2nd respondent and take further action 28.12.2025 of the 5th respondent and Counsel for the Petitioner: I.T.V.V. KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: provisions of Article direct the respondents 09.12.2024 and take 5th respondent forth with on the notice dated pass. JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.22002 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI ORDER; the ground that a representation not addressed, be directed to address the Pithily this Writ Petition is filed on made to the authorities, but it was dated 09.12.2024 was Therefore, it is urged that the respondents such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the representation, as case. in The Government of India v. In the Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in P, Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCC 613 held that; 2. Dispose of the representation' mantra is increasingly "9 mfirdteial process in the High Courts and the Tnbunals. Such ordim may make for a quick or easy disposal o cases n overburdened adjudicatory court Is the cause of justice. The litigant is back again before the Court, as hfs Iasi shows having incurred attendant costs and suffered dlLs of theTegal process. This would have been obviated by ctml t a colntlr in the first instance, thereby resulting ,n finality to the dispute. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a consideration" of a claim or representation Court to authorities, before should examine whether or whether it is * 3. directing the claim or representation is with reference to a "live" issue If it is with reference to a "dead or end to the matter and If the Court to tribunal with reference to a "dead" or "stale" issue "stale” issue or dispute, the Court/tribunal should put an direct consideration or reconsideration consideration" without itself examining should not the merits, it should deciding to direct make it clear that such consideration will be without prejudice to contention relating to limitation or delay and laches. Even if the Court does not expressly say so, that would be the legal position any ' 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 disservice than service to the cause of justice. such orders do more 5. However, the respondents representation dated 09.12.2024, accordingly, and communicate the decision to the are directed to consider the petitioner’s examine thoroughly, issue orders petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be to costs. no order as As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// fl^l^FFICER SEC To, 1. The Principal Secretary A.P.Secretariat,Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, , Eluru District, Eluru. 3. The Tahsildar, Mudinepalli Mandal, Mudinepalli, Eluru District. 4. The Mandal Surveyor, Mudinepalli Mandal Revenue Department Eluru District. 5. The Village Surveyor, Alluru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal 6. One CC to Sri. T V V Koteswara Rao , Eluru District. Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP For Revenue, High Court of Andhra 8. Two CD Copies. Pradesh [OUT] Al n HIGH COURT TL DATED:30/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 22002 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS