IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.15360 of 2003 Between: K.V.R.Chowdary s/o. Raghavaiah 4th ward, Pamarru Krishna District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Vijayawada,Krishna District.. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC.,Machilipatnam, Krishna 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 an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dt.19-7- 2003 in APSRTC NO.01/437(220)/2002-MEM thereby handover the site as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue his business nearby fruit and justice stall and to grant such other relief or reliefs and as this Hon'ble court deems ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B.SOMASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.15360 of 2003 ORDER: The petitioner was a licensee of three stalls in Pammarru bus station. When he wanted to run these stalls at one place, his request was rejected. He subsequently occupied open space of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation adjacent to fruit stall. He was asked to vacate, in vain. Therefore, impugned notice was issued on 19.07.2003 directing to vacate open space on pain of cancellation of licence. Petitioner contends that impugned order is arbitrary and illegal. This Court initially granted interim order. Subsequently, when respondents moved W.V.M.P.No.4138 of 2003, the interim order was vacated observing as under. When the petitioner did not vacate the open space occupied by him, which was available adjacent to the Fruits and Fruit Juices Stall, the respondents have issued notice for vacation of the space. It is the case of the petitioner that he has raised structures in the said open space, which was available adjacent to the Fruits and Fruit Juices Stall. It is his further case that if the spaces for three shops are allotted at one place, it would be convenient for him to look after his business effectively. When the petitioner was allotted particular place for speciﬁed stall, he cannot erect any structure in other than the space allotted to him and extend his business on his own. The space adjoining the Fruits and Fruit Juices Stall is not allotted to the petitioner, at any point of time, and, his request for running three stalls at one place was already rejected. In that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot continue in possession of the space, which he occupied on his own, which is not allotted to him. In that view of the matter, I do not ﬁnd any ground to continue the interim order. Interim order dated 7-8- 2003 passed in WPMP No.19008 of 2003 is vacated. Petitioner’s licence was valid up to 30.10.2005, and therefore, nothing survives in the writ petition. Even otherwise, following the reasoning of this Court while vacating the interim order, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner has no right to occupy the vacant space when only stall was given to him on the basis of licence. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 31.10.2008 vs To 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Vijayawada,Krishna District.. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC.,Machilipatnam, Krishna District 3 2CCs to 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ANURADHA}