APHC010547672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 28595/2025 Between: 1. BULLA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O PADMARAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O.UDDANDARAYUNIPALEM VILLAGE, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT AT GUNTUR, 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHASILDAR, TULLUR MANDAL, THULLUR, GUNTUR 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner representation dated 21.07.2025 submitted under Spandana vide request No. GNT 202507216926 for assignment of land Ac.1.08 cents, Ac.1.23 cents and Ac.1.31 cents comprising total extent Ac.3.63 cents of Mandadam Revenue village, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to consider the petitioner representation for assignment of above extents of land within a time bound programme and pass 2 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 respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 21.07.2025 submitted under Spandana vide request No. GNT 202507216926 for assignment of land Ac 1.08 cents, Ac.1.23 cents and Ac.1.31 cents comprising total extent of Ac.3.63 cents, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 28595 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the petitioner representation dated 21.07.2025 submitted under Spandana vide request No. GNT 202507216926 for assignment of land Ac 1.08 cents, Ac.1.23 cents and Ac. 1.31 cents comprising total extent Ac.3.63 cents of Mandadam Revenue village, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300- A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to consider the petitioner representation for assignment of above extents of land within a time bound programme and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem 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 not service to the cause of justice. The litigant is back again before the Court, as this case shows, having incurred attendant 4 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 21.07.2025, 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, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 23.10.2025 SPP 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:28595 of 2025 Date : 23.10.2025 SPP