APHC010531612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 27752/2025 Between: 1. VEERA VENKATA SRINADH RAJU JAMPANA, S/O. VENKATA SATYANARAYANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT- 45 YEARS, OCC- EMPLOYEE IN PRIVATE FIRM, TEMPORARY RESIDENCE- RV PANCHAJANYA, BLOCK A, FLAT NO. 303, CMC ENCLAVE, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD - 500084 PERMANENT RESIDENCE- H.NO. 8-189, GOPINAGAR, TURANGI, KAKINADA RURAL MANDALAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 533016. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522238 CELL - 91 8632444746. 2. THE TAHSILDHAR, KARAPA MANDAL, O/O. MANDAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, BESIDE KARAPA POLICE STATION, KARAPA, KAKINADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 533462 CELL-91 9849903908, EMAIL- EGOKRP@NIC.IN. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY OF IT ELECTRONIC AND COMMUNICATION, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522238. ...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, direction or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of Constitution of India declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in not considering the Petitioner’s representation dated 28th July 2025 and consequentially direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 28th July 2025, verify and issue certified copies of the revenue entries (i.e., e-Pattedar Passbook and Record of Rights 2 (ROR) Form 1-B entries, Adangal copy) of Petitioner’s land with Khata Number 2086, Karapa Village and Mandal, Kakinada District at his cost in the interest of justice and 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.2 to remove the digital lock against the entries of the land of the Petitioner with Khata Number 2086, Karapa Village and Mandal, Kakinada District pending disposal of the present writ petition in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ALLU MIDHUN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. G P FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AP The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 27752 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ, direction or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of Constitution of India declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in not considering the Petitioner’s representation dated 28th July 2025 and consequentially direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 28th July 2025, verify and issue certified copies of the revenue entries (i.e., e-Pattedar Passbook and Record of Rights (ROR) Form 1-B entries, Adangal copy) of Petitioner’s land with Khata Number 2086, Karapa Village and Mandal, Kakinada District at his cost in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Pithily this writ petition is filed on the ground that a representation was made to the authorities, but it was not addressed. Therefore, it is urged that the respondents be directed to address the representation, as such direction would suffice in the circumstances of the case. 3. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh reported in (2019) 15 SCC 613 held that: 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 4 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. 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 such orders do more disservice than service to the cause of justice. 5. However the respondents are directed that the petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2025, must be considered by the respondents, examined thoroughly, issue orders accordingly, and communicate the decision given to the petitioner. It goes without saying that the entire process will be completed within eight weeks from the date of the order is received. 6. With the above observation, 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. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 09.10.2025 SPP 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:27752 of 2025 Date : 09.10.2025 SPP