The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in a recent order dated 12 August 2025, addressed a writ petition filed by 16 individuals from Kadapa district, including Somisetty Subbarayudu and others. The petition challenged the inaction of authorities in referring their claim for compensation under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
The petitioners stated that their representation dated 18 June 2025, regarding compensation for acquired lands in Jonnavaram Village, Atloor Mandal, was ignored despite Award No. 3/2015-16 issued on 20 March 2015. They sought a direction to determine the market value and compensation through the competent authority.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against Jal Nigam Employee, Imposes Pro Bono Work on Petitioner
Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao referred to the Supreme Court judgment in The Government of India vs P. Venkatesh (2019) 15 SCC 613, which cautioned against mechanically directing "disposal of representation" without addressing the merits. The Court emphasized that such orders may cause repeated litigation, unnecessary costs, and delays.
"Before directing consideration of a claim, the Court must examine whether it relates to a live issue or a stale one," the judge noted.
Read also:- Orissa High Court Grants Relief to Lecturer Denied Promotion Under 2014 Placement Rules
The Court observed that, in this case, the representation required proper examination. It directed the concerned respondents to thoroughly consider the petitioners' claims, pass appropriate orders, and communicate the decision within six weeks from receipt of the order.
The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and any pending interlocutory applications were closed.
Case Title:- Somisetty Subbarayudu & Others vs The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others
Case No.:- Writ Petition No. 20342 of 2025
