THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.29251 of 2014 Dated:20.11.2014 Between:
Vumdi Siva Bhaskaralakshmi, D/o Durgaraju ….Petitioner And:
The Govt of A.P., reptd by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Co-Operation (Marketing.II) Department, Hyderabad and three others.
… Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P.Narasimha Rao Counsel for the Respondents: A.G.P. for Agriculture (Andhra Pradesh) 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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.3, in issuing the impugned notice directing the petitioner to evict Stall No.5, dated 11.09.2014, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of notice, as per the guidelines issued by the Govt, only on the ground of completion of three years period of permission to lease the stall to the petitioner, without giving any prior notice and without providing an opportunity of being heard, as illegal and arbitrary and against the Rules framed under GOMs.No.29, dated 16.02.2012, thereby depriving him of his livelihood and consequently, to set aside the impugned notice.”
At the hearing, it is not disputed by learned counsel for both the parties that the issue similar to that raised in this Writ Petition, viz., extension of allotment period of stall in Rythu Bazaar beyond three years, was decided by this Court, vide Writ Petition No.33549 of 2014, 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 Bazaars, 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, interim order, dated 26.09.2014, is vacated and WPMP.No.36572 of 2014 is dismissed as infructuous.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
20th November, 2014 DR