IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND TEN WRIT PETITION No.15202 of 2010 Between: J.Ramanjaneyulu. … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri T.Vinod Kumar for Sri O.Manohar Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Prohibition & Excise for R.1 to R.3. Sri M.Karibasaiah for R.4. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not considering the objections of the petitioner before granting A-4 license to respondent No.4 to establish the Shop in premises bearing Door No.20/27, Main Road, Guntakal, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri T.Vinod Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, representing respondents 1 to 3. The petitioner claims to be an Ex-Chairperson of Guntakal Municipality; that on coming to know that respondent No.4 became the highest bidder for Shop No.2 in Ward No.25 of Guntakal, he has made representations on 21-6-2010 to respondents 1 to 3 stating that the premises, in which the petitioner is proposing to open the Shop, is within a distance of 85 meters from the main gate and 65 meters from the small gate of the Government Hospital; and that, therefore, the same is in violation of Rule 27 of the A.P. Excise (Lease of Right of Selling by Shop and Conditions of License) Rules, 2005. Though no counter-affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondents, at the haring the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, on instructions, stated that the petitioner’s objections were considered and the same were found without any basis, because on actual measurement of the distance it was found that the premises, in which respondent No.4 has located his shop, is 106 meters from the main gate and 146 meters from the revolving gate of the Government General Hospital. In view of the above fact, there is no warrant for interference by this Court. One other reason on which interference can be declined is that except stating that he is an Ex- Chairperson of the Guntakal Municipality, the petitioner has not disclosed his locus to question the impugned action of the respondents. It is not his pleaded case that he is espousing the public cause or that his interests are personally affected by the opening of the shop by respondent No.4 at the premises in question. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. ---------------------------------------- - C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:03-8-2010 MNR