THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2324 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioner questions the action of the 1st respondent in issuing G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 05.02.2005, whereby certain guidelines were issued with regards the allotment of remaining 32 shops in Bowelpally Market Yard to the vegetable traders, Bharatnagar Commission Agents and the petitioner Association on cyclic rotation basis as per the revised value. The petitioner Association consists of grain merchants and coconut traders of Monda Market, Secunderabad, as its members. It is the case of the petitioner that the Agricultural Market Committee constructed new shops in Bowenpally Market Yard, Secunderabad, so as to accommodate the commission agents, grain merchants and coconut traders operating within Hissamgunj Monda Market, Secunderabad, as there was a proposal to dismantle the Monda market complex and construct a new shopping complex with road widening. For allotment of the shops at Bowenpally to the traders and commission agents shifting out of Monda market, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.233 dated 03.09.2001, prescribing the guidelines for allotment of shops at Bowenpally, on outright sale basis. The grievance of the petitioner is that though 54 shops were earmarked to their members, only 22 shops were allotted to their members, and therefore, it made several representations, requesting to allot the remaining 32 shops to its members, but without considering the said representations, the 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 05.02.2005, prescribing certain guidelines were issued with regards the allotment of remaining 32 shops in Bowelpally Market Yard to the vegetable traders, Bharatnagar Commission Agents and the petitioner Association on cyclic rotation basis as per the revised value, which adversely affects the interest of the members of the petitioner association. Hence, this writ petition. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, at paragraph 2, it is stated as under: “It is submitted that it is a fact that the Market Committee, Hyderabad, has constructed 141 number of shops at Bowenpally to shift the business from Monda Market, Secunderabad. In accordance with the G.O.Ms.No.233, dated 03.09.2001, out of 141 shops, 90 shops were allotted to the vegetable Commission Agents and 26 shops were allotted to the petitioner Association members. But only 22 members of petitioner Association occupied the shops and 4 shops were left vacant without any contenders from the petitioner Association to occupy in spite of allotment. After allotting 90 shops to vegetable commission agents and 26 shops to Grain & Coconut traders, 32 shops were left vacant. Since there are no contenders for allotment either from the petitioner association or any other all these years ever since the completion of construction of shops in 2001. It is submitted that the contention of the petitioner in this para is that the left out 32 shops must be allotted only to grain and coconut traders is false since as per the G.O.Ms.No.233, the Government has specifically identified only 26 eligible licensed traders for allotment of shops to grain traders and not to any more and the orders were implemented once for all in respect of them. Even out of 26 shops allotted to the petitioner association, only 22 contenders approached the Market Committee and deposited the amount for allotment and 4 shops were left vacant as the grain merchant allottees have not turned up who belong to the association. It is also submitted that the contention of the petitioner that 54 shops were earmarked in the layout for grain & coconut traders is false since there is no approved lay out of Bowenpally by the town planning authorities so far. It is further submitted that there is no right to the petitioner association or Secunderabad Vegetable Commission Agents Association to demand for allotment of shops and thus they have no claim on the allotment of the remaining 32 shops. But it is the right of the Government to allot the shops to any affected persons as previously done, since it is the property of Govt.” Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to the notice of this Court that in fact, earlier, some of the traders filed W.P.No.3988 of 2005 before this Court, questioning G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 05.02.2005, which is the subject matter in this writ petition, and this Court, having considered the averments mentioned in the counter affidavit filed therein and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners thereby, by order dated 05.04.2005 disposed of the said writ petition giving liberty to the respondents therein to complete the allotment in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 05.02.2005. It was further ordered that the petitioners can approach the 2nd respondent therein for allotment of the vacant site situated to be available for construction of the shops thereon by the petitioners. In view of the stand taken by the 2nd respondent in the counter affidavit filed by him and also the orders dated 05.04.2005 passed in W.P.No.3988 of 2005, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent for allotment of the vacant site, stated to be available, for construction of the shops thereon by the members of the petitioner Association. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 20.01.2011 v v/ksp