IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 20024 OF 2001 Between: Sri Veeranjaneya General Merchant, Rep. By its Prop. Kajjam Anjaneyulu. … Petitioner and The Superintendent of Prohibition & Excise, Guntur and two others. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 20024 OF 2001 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking declaration that the action of the respondents against the dealers in black jaggery as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Art.19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, and consequently restrain the respondents from taking any action against the petitioner. At the time of hearing, the petitioner filed a copy of the order of this court passed under identical circumstances in W.P.No.11667 of 2001, dated 14.06.2001, which reads: “The grievance of the petitioners is that they are dealing in jaggery business and on the ground that the jaggery may be diverted for manufacture of illicit liquor, there is constant harassment of the Excise Officials. The petitioners, therefore, plead for a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the business of the dealers in jaggery. The learned Government Pleader for Excise has placed before me the Memorandum in RC.No.1613/M1/95, dt. 29.6.1995 giving reference to Government Memo No.25779/Pol.F/A1/95-1, Home (Pol.F) Department, dated 22.6.1995 issued by the Director General of Police to take a stringent action against any such harassment. In the circumstances, it is for the petitioners to identify the person or persons who interfere with their business and report their names to the Inspector General of Police, who, I am sure, will take prompt action against them. In view of this position, the writ petition is closed.” Since the relief sought for is of general nature without any specifying any person or authority, the above cited order passed by this court under identical circumstances applies to the petitioner also. Therefore, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the same observations. No costs. _________________ S. Ananda Reddy, J. Dt. 11..07..2007 Kvh THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 20024 OF 2001 ORAL ORDER Dt. 11..07..2007