IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 5658 of 1996 Between: 1. Jari Durga Fruits Company, Rep. Prop: M.Srinivas, S/o. M.Sriramulu. Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 2. Pradeep Kumar Fruit Company, Rep. Prop: Pradeep Kumar, S/o. Manulal, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 3. Lalitha Kumar Fruit Company, Rep. Lalitha Kumar. S/o. Nagindass, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 4. Sky Moon Fruit Company, Rep. Prop: Fareeda Fathima, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 5. Ramakrishna Fruit Company, Rep. Prop: M.Gnaneshwar, S/o. M.Ramulu, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 6. Sri Gopalakrishna & Company, Rep. Partner-N.Sreemannarayana, S/o. Sreehari, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. The Director of Marketing, A.P., Hyderabad. 2. The Person-in-charge, (Dismissed) Hyderabad Agri. Market Committee, Hyderabad. (R-2 dismissed for default as per court order dt.6-4-2000) .....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 in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents herein in not constructing and allotting shops in favour of the petitioners, who are carrying on their business as Commission Agents, as illegal, improper and unjust and also declare that the petitioners are entitled for shops/vacant sites at Gaddiannaram Fruit Market Yard to carry on business as commission Agents. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.5658 of 1996 ORDER: None appears for the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader for Agriculture submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Bhavani Commission & General Merchant v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others. In the circumstances, the present writ petition is dismissed in terms of the orders in W.P.No.9066 of 1994 and batch. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA,J Date: 10th November, 2004. Ksn ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Director of Marketing, A.P., Hyderabad. 2. The Person-in-charge, (Dismissed) Hyderabad Agri. Market Committee, Hyderabad. 3. Two C. Cs to G.P. for Co-operation, High Court of A.P., HYDERABAD (OUT). 4. Two C.D. copies