IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21011 of 2007 Between: 1 G. Sanjeev Kumar, S/o. G. Sayaram, R/o. 7-2-4, Goshala Road, Nizamabad. 2 Ghulam Hussain, S/o. Khaja Hussain, R/o. 9-18-22, Mallepally, Nizamabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Municipal Corporation of Nizmabad, Rep. by its Commissioner, Nizamabad. 2 M.A. Fahim, S/o. Not Known to the Petitioners, R/o. Hotel Azizia, Back side of Nizamabad Bus Stand, Near Ashok Talkies, Nizamabad. 3 M.A. Saleem, S/o. Not Known to the Petitioners, R/o. Hotel Azizia, Back side of Nizamabad Bus Stand, Near Ashok Talkies, Nizamabad. 4 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Nizamabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of Respondent No.1 in preventing Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.3 from doing business in sale of food articles in stalls erected by them along side the compound wall of the APSRTC Bus Station, Nizamabad near the out gate and in gate of the said Bus Depot without obtaining any licence from Respondent No.1 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of Constitution of India and the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and consequently direct Respondent No.1 to forthwith take steps to remove the food stalls of Respondent No.2 and 3 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.S.RAMCHANDRA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.RADHA KRISHNA POLISETTY (SC FOR MPL) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by G.Sanjeev Kumar and Ghulam Hussain assailing the inaction of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Nizamabad, Nizamabad-1st respondent in removing the encroachments on road margin adjacent to the in-gate and out-gate of A.P.S.R.T.C. Bus Station, Nizamabad. 2. The petitioners are licensees to run Tea, Tiffin, Pan, Flower and Fruit stalls within A.P.S.R.T.C. Bus Station premises at Nizamabad on payment of fee of Rs.48,000/- per month. Since the business carried by M.A.Fahim-2nd respondent and M.A.Saleem-3rd respondent on the road margins is affecting the business of the petitioners, the petitioners submitted a representation to the Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Nizamabad, addressed to the Municipal Corporation, Nizamabad, for appropriate action. There being no action initiated by the 1st respondent-Corporation with regard to removal of respondents 2 and 3, who have been carrying on business in the road margins, the petitioners choose to approach this Court by invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Notice before admission has been ordered. Despite notice to the respondents 2 to 4, they did not choose to enter appearance. 1st respondent-Corporation entered appearance and filed counter-affidavit. 4. When the writ petition listed under the caption ‘for admission’, with the consent of counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Corporation. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that though the 1st respondent-Corporation stated in the counter-affidavit that necessary notices to the respondents 2 and 3 have been issued for removal of the encroachments from the road margins, no further steps have been taken to give effect to the notices issued to the respondents 2 and 3 and therefore, necessary direction is required to be given to the 1st respondent-Corporation to give effect to the notices issued to the respondents 2 and 3 and to pass appropriate orders. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners refers para.5 of the counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent-Corporation, which reads as hereunder: “In reply to the allegations made in para.-5 of the affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition, it is submitted that the petitioners made representations to this respondent to remove encroachment made by the respondents 2 and 4 only. In fact, there are some other small petty vendors running business by encroaching road margin. This respondent already issued notice to the respondents 2 and 3 for removal of encroachments from the road margin within 7 days from the date of receipt of the notice. In case, the same is not complied with by the respondents 2 and 3, the same will be got removed by this respondent. Further, it is submitted that in response to the 4th respondent’s letter this office has removed the temporary encroachments existing on the road margin.” 1st respondent-Corporation stated in the counter-affidavit that notices have already been issued to the respondents 2 and 3. It is for the 1st respondent-Corporation to give effect to the notices and pass final orders. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the 1st respondent-Corporation to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the notices issued to the respondents 2 and 3 with regard to the encroachments made by them on road margins within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The 1st respondent- Corporation has to communicate the action taken by it against the respondents 2 and 3 to the petitioners. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:03rd July, 2008. Note: Issue C.C. within a week. B/o cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}