IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16249 of 2008 Between: Sri Sri Sri Mavullamma Neerulli Kuragayala Varthaka Sankshema Sangam (Regd.No.441/07), Bhimavaram West Godavari District rep by its Secretary Balla Srinivasarao, S/o. B.Sesharao, aged 39 years D.No.5-9-17/2, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner, Bhimavaram Municipality, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 3 The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari 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 any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the lawful business of the members of the petitioner society in ward No.37 of Bhimavaram Municipality without assigning any reasons or issuing any notice or giving an opportunity of being heard as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, malafide and unwaranted and also against to the principles of natural justice and against Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the lawful business of the members of petitioner society in ward No.37 of Bhimavaram Municipality without following due process of law and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.S.SURYA PRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been filed by Sri Sri Sri Mavullamma Neerulli Kuragayala Varthaka Sankshema Sangam represented by its Secretary Balla Srinivasa Rao assailing the action of the respondents in interfering with the business carried on by its members in ward No.37 of Bhimavaram Municipality. Balla Srinivasa Rao has sworn to the affidavit filed support of the writ petition. The writ affidavit, in brief, is: The petitioner-society is registered under the Societies Registration Act. The members of the society are small vegetable vendors who sell their vegetables. The Commissioner, Bhivaram Municipality-2nd respondent permitted the members of the petitioner-Society to sell vegetables on Wednesdays and Sundays in ward No.37 in Bhivaram Municipality. The respondents started interfering with the business carried on by the petitioner-society despite collecting taxes and market fees. Para 6 of the writ affidavit reads as hereunder: “I submit that the members of the petitioner society are small vegetable vendors eking out their livelihood by selling the vegetables in the said market on Wednesdays and Sundays that too for a few hours for which the 2nd respondent is collecting the taxes and market fee and the petitioner society is paying the same regularly. If the members of the society are prevented from selling their produce without any reasons, it would be deprivation of their livelihood and it infringes the constitutional rights of the members of the petitioner society.” When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Municipality received notice. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the members of the petitioner-society have been paying the taxes and market fee to the 2nd respondent and so long as the 2nd respondent receives taxes and market fee, the business carried on by the members of the petitioner-society in Ward No.37 cannot be interfered with by the 2nd respondent. Learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that in case the members of the petitioner-society are to be prevented from carrying on the business at Ward No.37, the 2nd respondent will follow the due process of law. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the 2nd respondent to follow due process of law in the event of permission granted by them to carry on the business activities by the members of the petitioner-society on Wednesdays and Sundays in Ward No.37 of Bhimavaram is required to be cancelled. In view of the direction given to the 2nd respondent, 1st and 3rd respondents shall not interfere with the business being carried on by the members of the petitioner-society except in accordance with the provisions of law. No costs. __________ 28-07-2008 Note: Issue operative portion By wire. (B.O) rkk