THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32531 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the final notice, dated 24.11.2011, issued by respondent No.2 for eviction of the petitioners from the subject lands without giving them an opportunity of being heard and verifying the documents, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, set aside the final notice. 2. The averments, in brief, stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of small business places in Survey No.9/1 and its sub-divided survey numbers adjacent to the pavements and drain, opposite to the Srinivasam on western side of bye pass road in Tirupati, since more than a decade. They were all earlier cultivators of the lands where the present Srinivasam was constructed by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (T.T.D.) in 2001. Since a title dispute is pending and the petitioners being agriculturists and cultivators of those lands, they are advised to use the subject lands for their livelihood. The petitioners took trade licences from respondent No.2 and are paying licence fee for the last ten years. On 20.09.2011, without issuing any notice or giving any intimation to the petitioners, respondent No.2 along with electricity power supply people and their staff came to the subject lands to evict them from the subject lands. Therefore, the petitioners filed W.P.No.26821 of 2011, which was disposed of on 23.09.2011 with a direction to respondent No.2 not to evict the petitioners from the places in their occupation without issuing show-cause notices to them and considering the objections, if any, filed by them. Respondent No.2, in turn, on 16.10.2011, issued a notice to the petitioners to vacate the subject lands within ten days after receipt of the notice or submit explanation. The petitioners submitted their explanation on 27.10.2011, along with all the trade licence receipts, paid receipts of power supply, licence fee assessment notices and receipts etc. But, till now no opportunity has been given by respondent No.2. On 24.11.2011, the impugned notice was issued without giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are the petty vendors doing their respective businesses in the subject lands for a long time; that their raising of small huts would not cause any inconvenience to the traffic; and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned notice. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2 contended that as provided under Section 405 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the Commissioner may without notice, remove anything erected, deposited or hawked or exposed for sale in contravention of Act; that the petitioners filed W.P.No.26821 of 2011 alleging that without taking recourse to due process of law and without providing the petitioners an alternative source of livelihood, respondent No.2 attempted to evict them from the subject lands; that this Court by order, dated 23.09.2011, directed respondent No.2 to issue show-cause notices to the petitioners; that in pursuance of the directions of this Court, a show-cause notice was issued on 16.10.2011, for which the petitioners submitted their explanation; that after considering their explanation, the impugned notice was issued; that therefore, the impugned notice needs no interference; and hence, he prays to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. The allegation is that the petitioners raised temporary structures over the drain/pavement without Municipal Corporation permission. In pursuance of notice, dated 16.10.2011, petitioners gave an explanation on 27.10.2011 and again on 02.12.2011. The petitioners have not filed any document to show that they have right to construct the thatched huts on the pavement or municipal drain in the street. In the absence of any violation of the rights of petitioners, they are liable to be evicted from the premises in question because the illegally raised huts on the subject lands are causing serious traffic congestion opposite to T.T.D. Srinivasam Complex and hindrance for construction of sub-way under bridge to facilitate the pilgrims to pass from Tirumala APSRTC bus stand to T.T.D. Srinivasam Complex and T.T.D. Madhavam Complex. The case of the petitioners is that they are doing their respective businesses for a long time and so, they have to secure alternative accommodation for the purpose of doing their respective business in the petty shops. Considering the fact that the petitioners are doing their respective businesses for a long time, reasonable time can be granted to them to vacate the subject lands by duly removing the structures. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to vacate the subject lands by duly removing the structures, within a period of four weeks from today failing which the respondent corporation shall take immediate steps for removal of those structures without giving any further notice to the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J December 12, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Dated: 12.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32531 OF 2011 Between: K. Munikrishna and others ..... PETITIONERS AND State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32531 OF 2011 December 12, 2011 MD