IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10558 of 2004 Between: 1 C. Srinivas, S/o. somaiah, (Sri Thirumala Travels) Opp: Megha Theatre, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. 2 G. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Kondaiah, C/o. Sri Santosh Stores Beside Shivani Lodge, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. 2 M. Chandrasekhar, Circle Inspector of Police, Saroornagar P.S., R.R. District. .....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 declaring the impugned action of the 2nd respondent in interfering with the petty business of the petitioners and preventing the petitioners from conducting their business under the name and style of Gagana Tours and Travels and S.K.Travels situated at Dilsukhnagar without any reason thereby depriving the petitioners of their livelihood as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India For the Petitioners R.G.V.SHIVAJI, Advocate For the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners alleging that the second respondent is interfering with their business without any reason and without registering any case against them by depriving their livelihood. 2. According to the petitioners, they are eking out their livelihood as Commission Agents by running Tours and Travel by booking tickets for passengers of private buses. According to the petitioners, the same does not require any licence. By selling the tickets, the petitioners would be getting Rs.10/- to Rs.15/- as commission for each ticket, which is their only source of livelihood. In order to deny and deprive the said livelihood, second respondent is interfering and preventing the petitioners from carrying on the business. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Though, this writ petition was listed on 25.06.2004, at request it is adjourned to today for getting instructions. But, the learned Government Pleader for Home could not get any instructions, however, represented for disposal of the writ petition. 3. Heard both sides and considered material on record. 4. According to the petitioners, though no case was registered against them by the second respondent, the second respondent is interfering with the business of Tours and Travels, which is being carried on by the petitioners by booking tickets for private buses. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent not to interfere with the business of the petitioners, unless any case is registered against them for violation of any of the provisions, under which the second respondent is entitled to take appropriate action. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the admission stage. --------------------- 29.06.2004 Note: Furnish CC by tomorrow B/o va To 1 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. 2 M. Chandrasekhar, Circle Inspector of Police, Saroornagar P.S., R.R. District. 3. Two CCs to G.P. for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 4. Two CD copies