APHC010716622025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 270/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK MASTAN VALLI, S/P. BABJAN, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O.THETTU VILLAGE,, KURABALAKOTA MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT-517352 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAYACHOTI, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT- 516269 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIDHAL OFFICER, MADANAPALLI, ANNAMAYYA. DISTRICT-517325 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MADARIAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.-517325 ...RESPONDENT(S): The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue . writ, order or directions more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not considering the petitioner's F- Line application dt. 17.11.2025 for conducting survey and fix the boundaries of the land in Sy.No.891/2, to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents, situated at Kollabylu Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District as illegal. arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 300- A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent to conduct survey and fix the boundaries for the land in Sy.No.891/2, to an extent of Ac.0.30 cents, situated at Kollabylu Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District and to pass….” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the F-Line application dated 17.11.2025 submitted by the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents readily agreed to consider the F-Line application dated 17.11.2025 submitted by the Petitioner, if any pending with the authorities. 5. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Respondents, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to consider the F-Line application dated 17.11.2025 submitted by the petitioner, this Court find no other alternative except to issue such direction. 6. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to consider the F-Line application dated 17.11.2025 submitted by the petitioner within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by passing a speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stake holders if any. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH 07.01.2026 klk 12019 (8) SCALE 544 164 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.270 of 2026 07.01.2026 kkllkk