IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3110 of 2008 Between: Smt. R. Eswaramma W/o. Subrahmanyam Shop No.26, Vista Complex, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, R/o. AMC Colony, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, 2 The Sub Collector, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, 3 The Tahasildar Bhadrachalam (M) at Bhadrachalam, .....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 to issue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in closing the shop of the petitioner vide shop No.26 at Vista Complex, Bhadrachalam, Khammam District without issuing any notice and without providing opportunity and taking steps to allot the said shop to 3rd party as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue her fancy shop as usual and pass such other or further orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Smt.R.Eswaramma assailing the action of the respondents in closing her shop No.26 in Vista Complex at Bhadrachalam without providing opportunity to her and taking steps to allot the shop to third party. 2. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe. She has been running fancy shop in Shop No.26 in Vista Complex at Bhadrachalam. The said shop came to be allotted to her in the month of December, 2002. She deposited Rs.4,525/- and she has been paying rent of Rs.750/- per month. She paid rental amount for the month of December, 2007. Whileso, the Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam-2nd respondent came to the shop on 04.02.2008 and directed her to vacate the shop immediately. The Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam-2nd respondent instructed the Tahsildar, Bhadrachalam-3rd respondent to lock the shop itself on the same day. Hence, she approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 25.02.2008. The learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare received notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. 2nd respondent filed counter-affidavit. Katamaneni Bhaskar, Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam, has sworn to the counter-affidavit. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that the petitioner violated the conditions of allotment and consequently notices have been issued to her canceling the allotment. Thereafter, Shop No.26 came to be allotted to one Bhukya Mohan Rao. Para.4 of the counter-affidavit needs to be noted and it is thus: “4. In reply to para.4 of the petitioner’s affidavit it is submitted that on 02.02.2008 the 3rd respondent passed proceedings No.C/SPL/2007 canceling the allotment of the shops to the petitioner and to the others. The said order has been communicated through the Village Revenue Officer, Bhadrachalam and the said VRO affixed the order copies in the premises of the petitioner’s shop and to the others as the original allottees are not in the shops on 03.02.2008, as such the allegation of the petitioner that no notice has been issued to her before passing the impugned order is nothing but misleading this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, the 3rd respondent duly following the procedure contemplated rightly passed the impugned order against the petitioner and others. A copy of the same is here with filed for perusal of this Hon’ble Court. It is also relevant to submit here that 2nd respondent never instructed the 3rd respondent to lock the shop of the petitioner. In pursuance of the above cancellation order the 3rd respondent on 04.02.2008 issued press note calling for fresh applications for shop Nos.24, 26, 29, 30. 31, 32 from the eligible tribals and also informed that there will be a lucky draw for allotting the shops at 11’o clock in sub-collector’s office, Bhadrachalam. Accordingly, 28 applications have been received and lucky draw was conducted before the S.T. beneficiaries as well as in the presence of Sub- Collector, Bhadrachalam and allotted shops in Vistha Complex to the S.T. beneficiaries on 05.02.2008 and the 3rd respondent issued proceedings with regard to the said allotment shop Nos.24, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32 and directed the individuals to approach the administrative officer, Bhadrachalam and remit the deposit and rent amounts as fixed and take over the possession from the MRI-I of Bhadrachalam. Accordingly, the following individuals are in peaceful possession of the shops. S.No. Vista ComplexShop No. Name of the Scheduled Tribe Beneficiary who got shop in lucky draw Husband/Father name Address 1. 24 Boggula Rajamma Veeraiah Bhadrachalam 2. 26 Bhukya MohanRao ---- Pichukalapadu 3. 29 K.VenkateswarRao Muthaiah Bhadrachalam 4. 30 Bhukya Veeramma Laxma Naik ---- 5. 31 Pujari Kondala Rao Buchaiah Bhadrachalam 6. 32 Paddam Laxmikantam Peddamallaiah Bhadrachalam. It is just and necessary to submit here that the petitioner herein filed the present writ petition on 14.02.2008 even at that time the petitioner having knowledge of the allotment of the shops to the S.T. Beneficiaries i.e., 05.02.2008 and also having received the notice on 21.11.2007 failed to submit her explanation and suppressing all the factual aspects filed the present writ petition and mislead this Hon’ble Court and also wasted the valuable time of this Hon’ble Court, therefore, this Hon’ble Court may take into the consideration of the counter, dismiss the above writ petition with exemplary costs.” 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to scheduled tribe and her source of income is only through the petty business being carried out in Shop No.26. A further submission has been made that the petitioner was not put on notice of any laches on her part before canceling the shop allotted to her and therefore, it amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents submits that the shop of the petitioner came to be inspected by the authorities and found her not transacting the business at the shop and she committed violation of the conditionw of allotment and thereupon the allotment in her favour came to be cancelled. A further submission has been made that the shop in question has been allotted to another person viz., Bhukya Mohan Rao. Along with the counter-affidavit, copies of the proceedings leading to termination of allotment in favour of the petitioner have been placed on record. 8. The material placed on record shows that the respondents followed due procedure before terminating the allotment of Shop No.26 to the petitioner. I do not see any procedural lapses on the part of the respondents in terminating the allotment of Shop No.26 to the petitioner. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner seeks permission to submit a representation afresh to the respondents for allotment of the same shop, if vacant as on this day or any other shop. 10. Such is the situation, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents for allotment of the same shop No.26, if it is vacant, or some other shop and in which case her representation may be considered in accordance with the procedure contemplated for the allotment of shops to the tribals. 11. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:08th August, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}