D Md Abdul Razzakh vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 10066 AP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10066 AP
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2024

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

D Md Abdul Razzakh vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 8 November, 2024

Author: B Krishna Mohan

Bench: B Krishna Mohan

APHC010492422024
                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                   AT AMARAVATI                         [3233]
                            (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                   FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
                     TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                  PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

                       WRIT PETITION NO: 25432/2024

Between:

D Md Abdul Razzakh and Others                               ...PETITIONER(S)

                                     AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others                    ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

     1. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA KOLLURU

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

     1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

No.2 in taking steps to evict the petitioners from their respective shops

located at main road margin, LIC building, near Vijaya Talkies,

Innespeta, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, without issuing any

HBKM, J

prior notice as issued under Section 18(3) of the Street Vendors

(Protection Of Livelihood And Regulation Of Street Vending) Act, 2014

and Rules.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners are continuing in the subject area by running the respective

shops for the last so many years. When there was a threat from the

respondent No.2 earlier, they filed W.P.No.16888 of 2002 which was

disposed of with a direction by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra

Pradesh, dated 05.09.2002 as under:

"The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to explore the possibility of rehabilitating the petitioner in case their eviction is inevitable. The petitioners shall not be disturbed as long as their continuance at the present place does not cause any traffic congestion or public inconvenience. No costs."

4. Thereafter, there was no disturbance from the respondent No.2

and accordingly, the petitioners carried on the business in the subject

shops. When there was a threat from the traffic police for their

business, the petitioners approached the District Legal Services

Authority, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District vide LAC.No.359 of

2002, which was disposed of, on 07.12.2002 as under:

"Hence, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Traffic Police Station, Rajahmundry is directed not to cause any

HBKM, J

inconvenience to the business of the petitioners except on the decision taken by the Municipal Commissioner, Rajahmundry in that regard. Hence, the petition is closed."

5. Thereafter, when the third parties tried to interfere with their

business, the petitioners approached the Civil Court and later, they

filed A.S.No.107 of 2015, which was allowed by the learned

V Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, vide

Judgment, dated 28.11.2022. Now, the respondent No.2 is trying to

proceed against the petitioners' subject shops without following any

due procedure highhandedly.

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing for the respondents submits that if so warranted the

respondent No.2 would follow the due procedure.

7. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the

respondents are directed to deal with the petitioners shops strictly in