HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos. 1162, 1163, 1164 and 1166 of 2014 Date: 09.09.2014 W.A.No.1162 of 2014 Between:
The Agricultural Market Committee, Narsaraopet, Guntur.
… Appellant And K. Pulla Reddy & another.
… Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos. 1162, 1163, 1164 and 1166 of 2014 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) These appeals are filed against the interlocutory orders passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petitions, whereby His Lordship was pleased to pass interim orders restraining the appellant before us from evicting the writ petitioners/respondents.
The admitted fact is that the writ petitioners/respondents were granted lease for a period of five years to occupy their respective shops. The said lease period expired on 11.08.2014. However, there is a clause in the lease deed for renewal of the lease period, which has to be exercised by the appellant on its own discretion. The request of the writ petitioners for renewal of the lease period was rejected and a decision was taken for their eviction and accordingly they were evicted. In the aforesaid background, we pass the following order.
It is an admitted position that the request for renewal has been rejected. Therefore, at present, prima facie, the writ petitioners do not have any subsisting right to remain in occupation of the said shops. The learned Single Judge has not considered the aforesaid admitted prima facie fact. Moreover, balance of convenience has also not been weighed. Under these circumstances, the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, are not sustainable and the same are accordingly set aside.
However, we desire that the writ petitions shall be heard out expeditiously. Let counter affidavits be filed in the writ petitions within two weeks from date. Affidavit in reply is to be filed within two weeks thereafter. In case of failure to file counter affidavits in the time stipulated above, the writ petitions shall be heard out in the absence of the counter affidavits. It would be open for the writ petitioners to participate in the auction to be conducted by the appellant without prejudice and in that process if they succeed the same shall abide by the result of the writ petitions. In any view of the matter, in the said auction if the shops are allotted to third parties, they shall also abide by the result of the writ petitions.
The writ appeals are accordingly allowed.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J
Date: 09.09.2014 ES