APHC010550492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 29551/2025 Between: 1. GANTA BHASKAR RAO, S/O LATE VENKATA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, SENIOR CITIZEN, R/O NELLIPUDI VILLAGE, SANKHAVARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, MGM CAPITAL, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE KAKINADA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, RAJAHMUNDRY. 6. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, THONDANGI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. THE BENDAPUDI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, BENDAPUDI VILLAGE, TONDANGI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI 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 issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the 7th Respondent in taking action on the petitioners representation, dated 24-05-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, injustice, and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.4 to consider the petitioners representation, dated 24-05-2025 pass IA 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.7 to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 24-05-2025 pass orders within a fixed time frame by communicating the same to the petitioner herein and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: Declaring the action of the 7th respondent in not taking action on the petitioners representation dated 24.05.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri A.Venkata Durga Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. 3. The pleadings are as vague as they could be. The provisions mentioned in the affidavit are incorrect and not related to the subject issue. This Court is not inclined to entertain this kind of affidavits. It is well settled principle of law that the Courts are within its power and jurisdiction to impose costs as an act of deterrence to vexatious, frivolous and speculative litigation and defence, in order to make other litigant think twice before filing vexatious, frivolous and speculative claim or defence as stated in the case of Sathyapal Singh V. Union of India and Another 1. This Writ petition squarely falls within the said principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs, however, this Court taking lenient view, is inclined to dismiss the writ petition without imposing costs. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application if he is so advised/desire. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 03rd November, 2025 RKS 1 (2010) 12 SCC 70