THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17454 of 2014 Dated: 19.11.2014 Between:
N. Sujatha .. Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and others.
.. Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. G. Venkata Reddy Counsel for the respondents: A.G.P. for Agriculture The court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief:
“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th & 5th respondents in trying to evict the petitioner from Stall No.150 situated in Rythu Bazaar at Swarajyamaidan, Vijayawada, Krishna District, allotted in her favour vide Procs.No:A1/72/2009, dated 02.05.2009 which is subsisting as on today, without following due process of law only by succumbing to the pressures put forth by the local politicians who want to induct their own person, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the instructions issued by the 2nd respondent vide Lr.No.RBZ/934/2013, dated 29.11.2013 and in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct 4th & 5th respondents not to interfere/evict the petitioner from Stall No.150 at Rythu Bazaar, Swarajyamaidan, Vijayawada, Krishna District.”
At the hearing, it is not disputed by the learned counsel for both parties that the issue similar to that raised in this writ petition viz., extension of allotment period of a stall in Rythu Bazar beyond three years, was decided by this Court in W.P.No.33549 of 2014, which was dismissed by order dated 10.11.2014.
For the same reasons as contained in the aforesaid order, this writ petition is dismissed with the direction that the reasons contained therein shall form part of this order. However, this order will not preclude the Joint Collectors in the State to consider letter No.RBZ/934/2013 dated 29.11.2013 of the Chief Executive Officer, Rythu Bazars, Hyderabad, and extend the term of the petitioner at his discretion. For a period of two weeks, the petitioner shall not be evicted from the stall allotted to her, to enable her to make representation to the competent authority.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the writ petition, interim order dated 27.06.2014 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.21841 of 2014 and W.V.M.P.No.2185 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 19th November, 2014 IBL