■ APHC010427452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUS TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR WRIT PETITION ND; 22357 OF 7C\9Fi RAO Between: 1. Boddeda Venkata Narasimham, S/o. Late Jaggarao, Aged 59 years, Occ- Business, R/o. Door No.5-31, Nagulapallil Village Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Munagapaka 2. Boddeda Jagadish, S/o. Boddeda Venkata years, Occ Business Narasimham, Aged 38 R/o. Door No.5-31, Nagulapallil Village, Munagapaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3. Boddeda Tarun Manoj, S/o. Boddeda Venkata years, Occ- Business, R/o. Door No.7-46/9/3, Bazar Sliver Oax School, Rushikonda, Visakhapatnam Narasimham, Aged 36 Flat No. 104, Chinna District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Land Acquisition) District. 2. The Special Deputy Collector(Land Acquisition), Anakapally District. Officer, Anakapally Division, Anakapally 4. The Tahsildar, Mungapaka Mandal, Anakapally District. A.P. Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur Polavaram Irrigation Project, Rajamahendravaram 3. The Revenue Divisional District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the praying that in the may be in the nature Respondents in not 03.01.2025 and considering the objections/explanation of the Petitioners dt. 06.03.2025 while passing award Notification No.B1/49/2020, dt. 21.11.2024 i Form No.VI-A, further issued Form-VII in on 03.02.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, I and Transparency In Act, 2013in violation of against the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement principal of natural justice and against all settle principles of law and consequently direct the Respondents to consider their 03.01.2025 and 06.03.2025 made by the Petitioners favour of the Petitioners herein. representations dt. while passing award in LA NO: 1 OF 20?*; Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court direct the Respondents to may be pleased to consider their representations dt. 03.01.2025 and 06.03.2025 made by the Petitioners while passing award in favour of the main Writ Petition. Petitioners herein pending disposal of the Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s. Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 The Court made the following order: KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA to 4: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION V APHC010427452025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22357/2025 Between: 1.BODDEDA VENKATA NARASIMHAM, S/0. LATE JAGGARAO, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R/0. DOOR NO.5-31, NAGULAPALLIL VILLAGE, MUNAGAPAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2.BODDEDA JAGADISH,, S/0. BODDEDA VENKATA NARASIMHAM, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/0. DOOR NO.5-31, NAGULAPALLIL VILLAGE, MUNAGAPAKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3.BODDEDA TARUN MANOJ,, S/0. BODDEDA VENKATA NARASIMHAM, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS. R/0. DOOR NO.7-46/9/3, FLAT NO. 104, CHINNA BAZAR SLIVER OAX SCHOOL, RUSHIKONDA,VISAKHAPATNAMDISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1 .THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ACQUISITION), A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.HE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION, IRRIGATION RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, ANAKAPALLY DISTRICT. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THE REVENUE OFFICER ANAKAPALLY DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, THE TAHSILDAR, MUNGAPAKA MANDAL ANAKAPALLY DISTRICT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT (LAND POLAVARAM PROJECT, DIVISIONAL ANAKAPALLY DIVISION, ...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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the objections/explanation of the 06.03.2025 while passing award 21.11.2024 in Form No.VI-A, further issued Form-VII on 03.02.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of the Right to Fair Respondents in not considering the Petitioners dt. 03.01.2025 and Notification No.BI/49/2020, dt. 03.01.2025 and Notification No.BI/49/2020, dt. 2 Compensation and Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013in violation of and against all settle principles of law and Respondents to consider their representations 06.03.2025 made by the Petitioners while the Petitioners herein and to lA NO: 1 OF 202^ 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 Respondents consider their representations dt. 03.01.2025 and 06.03.2025 made bv the Petitioners while passing award in favour of the Petitioners herein pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and to Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION principal of natural justice consequently direct the dt. 03.01.2025 and passing award in favour of pass to pass V 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.22357 of 2025 ORDER:- Pithily, this writ petition is filed on the ground that representations dated 06.03.2025 and 03.01.2025 was 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. 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 egsy 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 1 (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. Disposal of proceedings by seemingly innocuous orders 4. 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 petitioners’ representations dated 06.03.2025 and 03.01.2025 be considered by examining thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision to the petitioners. 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. Sd/-SHAIK WIOHD RAR assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Land Acquisition), State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. \ 2. The Special Deputy Collector(Land Acquisition), Project, Rajamahendravaram, Anakapally District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer District. 4. The Tahsildar, Mungapaka Mandal, Anakapally District. 5. One CC to M/s. Kalla Tulasi Durgamba, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCS to GP for Land Acquisition, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. Polavaram Irrigation Anakapally Division, Anakapally ssb HIGH COURT DATED:28/08/2025 ORDER WP No. 22357 OF 2025 »NOS^ I I t SEP 2025 g ^ . Curreni Jiecuon . disposing of the w.p. without costs