APHC010437992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADES AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) H MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO ^ WRIT PETITION NO: 22855 OF 2025 Between: Y. Bhaskar, S/o. Y. Venkataramana, aged about 45 years, R/o. 3- 169-13- 150-105, Gowthami Nagar, B K Palli, Madanapalle Pradesh. Chittoor, Andhra ...Petitioner- AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Mandal Surveyor, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. District, Andhra ...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 of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner PGRS Grievance No. ANMY202411258439, dated 25-11-2024 and in not conducting the F-Line— survey and mutation of the petitioner land in Survey No. 689 of Kottavaripalli Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal endorsement in Roc No. C/09/2024 dated 28-10-2024, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5 Annamayya District, despite particularly the Tahsildar survey of the on his PGRS Grievance No. 2024 within a time frame fixed by this i.e., respondent No.4, Madanapalle Mandal, to conduct F-Line petitioner land and pass appropriate orders ANMY202411258439 dated 25-11- Hon’ble Court..— lA NO: 1 OF 202fi Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct Respondents 2 to 5 to consider and take appropriate action on the petitioner’s PGRS Grievance No. ANMY202411258439 dated 25-11- 2024, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VENKATESH KOSARAJU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE ^ The Court made the following order: f APHC010437992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22855/2025 Between: 1.Y BHASKAR, S/0. Y. VENKATARAMANA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/0. 3- 169-13-150-105, GOWTHAMI NAGAR, B K PALLI, MADANAPALLE, CHITTOOR,ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5.THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner PGRS Grievance No. ANMY202411258439, dated 25-11- 2024 and in not conducting the F-Line survey and mutation of the petitioner land in Survey No. 689 of Kottavaripalli Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, despite endorsement in Roc No. C/09/2024 dated 28-10-2024, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5, particularly the Tahsildar i.e., respondent No.4, Madanapalle Mandal, to conduct F- Line survey of the petitioner land and pass appropriate orders on his PGRS Grievance No. ANMY202411258439 dated 25-11- 2024 within a time frame fixed by this Honble Court and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct Respondents 2 to 5 to praying that in the 2 consider and take appropriate action on the petitioner’s PGRS Grievance No. ANMY202411258439 dated 25-11-2024, pending disposal of the above writ petition, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VENKATESH KOSARAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.22855 of 2025 ORDER:- Pithily, this writ petition is filed on the ground that grievance NO.ANMY202411258439 dated 25.11.2024 was made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the grievance, as such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. The Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. 2. 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...” This Court is not oblivious of the fact that a Court to authorities. 3. 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. stale" issue or dispute, the If it is with reference to a "dead" or 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 directing consideration of representations 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. 4. However, the respondents are directed that the petitioner’s grievance No.ANMY202411258439 dated 25.11.2024 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. 5. 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/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Pradesh, Revenue Department, District, Andhra Pradesh. *r ■ V 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Mandal Surveyor, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, Andl>r^ Pradesh. 6. One CC to SRI. VENKATESH KOSARAJU, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OtTf] 8. Two CD Copies NM HIGH COURT DATED:01/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 22855 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS