IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P.Nos.28029 of 2008, 551 and 3686 of 2009 WRIT PETITION NO : 28029 of 2008 Between: Andhavarapu Kameswara RAo S/o.Late Vykunta RAo R/o.Plot No.22, Srinivas nagar colony Official colony, Srikakulam ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Municipal Commissioner,Srikakulam Municipality Srikakulam 2 The Municipal Chairman, Srikakulam Municipality Srikakulam 3 The District Collector, Srikakulam .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to allot the shops by following due procedure either by auction or by lottery system in the newly constructed market yard. WRIT PETITION NO : 551 of 2009 Between: Potnuru Gurunadha Rao, S/o. late govinda Rajulu, R/o. D.No.16-2-150 Gujarathpeta Post, Srikakulam-I ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Municipal Commissioner, Srikakulam Municipality, Srikakulam 2 The Municipal Chairman, Srikakulam Municipality, Srikakulam 3 The District Collector, Srikakulam. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to allot the shops in the Newly constructed market yard in the existing place by following due procedure i.e., by way of auction or by way of lottery system. WRIT PETITION NO : 3686 of 2009 Between: 1 Pradeep Kumar Phadi S/o. Late Kaivala Chandra Phadi Door No.6-6---(1)-14/2, Pandu Ranga Street, Srikakulam. 2 Prabhakar Phadi S/o. Souri Phadi Door No.6-6---(1)-14/2, Pandu Ranga Street, Srikakulam. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Municipal Commissioner Srikakulam Municipality Srikakulam. 2 The Municipal Chairman Srikakulam Municipality Srikakulam. 3 The District Collector Srikakulam. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a order or direction more particularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondent No.2 to allot the shops in the Newly constructed market yard in the existing place by following due procedure. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Counsel for the RespondentsNo.: MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: These three writ petitions are filed questioning the action of the Municipal Chairman, Srikakulam Municipality, the 2nd respondent herein in allotting the shops without following any procedure and without considering the claims of the existing members. Therefore, they are being heard and disposed of by this common order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned standing counsel for the respondent Municipality and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The case of the petitioners is that the Srikakulam Municipality has constructed a market yard for the convenience of the people of Srikakulam 5 decades back and since all the shops became dilapidated, the municipal council through a resolution passed in the meeting agreed to demolish the old market and to construct/renovate the market yard in the existing place. Accordingly the market was demolished and new shops were constructed. The grievance of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent Municipal Chairman, without following any procedure, is allotting the shops to new persons without considering the claims of existing members as per their whims and fancies. Hence they filed these writ petitions seeking appropriate directions. The main contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the allotment of the shops was not made in the presence of the Commissioner or in the presence of the Municipal Chairperson and the 2nd respondent has handed over the allotment to their men, who have distributed among themselves certain shops and allotted few shops to other members on draw. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit inter alia denying the allegations made by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is stated that since the shop owners in the old market are continuously paying 25% rent and the council considered the request of lessees for allotment of shops without auction, allotment of shops to the individuals is still pending before the council. It is also stated that the mode of allotment of shops to individuals as per the council resolution dated 2.12.2008 is pending before the Srikakulam Municipal Council and that it is very difficult to allot shops by conducting lottery or draw system since the new shops are fixed with separate rents as per C.R.No.2/1050 dated 7.11.2008 and also in view of separate blocks provided by the council to vegetable merchants and kirana merchants for the public convenience and hence, so far no allotment of shops has been made. Thereafter, an additional counter affidavit is filed stating that the Rules framed by the Government are being implemented by the council as the council only is the competent authority to allot any shop to the individuals. The council has already resolved to allot shops to the existing lease holders only as they are paying 25% of the old rent as per Council Resolution dated 21.7.2007 and that the allotment will be placed before the council for confirmation after drawing lots to the existing shop lessees. In view of averments made in the additional counter affidavit, the allegation levelled by the petitioners that the 2nd respondent is going to allot the shops as per his whims and fancies cannot be sustained. It is admitted by the respondents that they are going to allot the shops to all the old lessees after drawing lots. However, the petitioners expressed apprehension about conducting of the auction or drawing of lots by the Municipal Chairperson and stated that the drawing of lots may be done in the presence of the Joint Collector, Srikakulam, for which the learned standing counsel for the respondents agreed. In the circumstances, the Joint Collector, Srikakulam District is directed to be present at the time of drawing the lots by the respondents in respect of allotment of shops in the newly constructed market yard. With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.6.3.2009 msv