Cherla Poshetty vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 3039 Tel

                  HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

                        WRIT PETITION No.24870 OF 2021
ORDER:

Heard Mr. D. Bhasker Reddy, learned counsel for the

petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Municipal

Administration & Urban Development; Revenue and Home appearing

on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 respectively, and Mr. N.

Praveen Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for Municipality appearing

on behalf of respondent No.3.

2. As per the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of

the writ petition, the case of the petitioners is that they are eking out

their livelihood by rearing of pigs. Respondent No.3, Municipality,

has entrusted the job of catching their pigs to private agency for

transporting, selling and destroying them. The grievance of the

petitioners is that the action of respondent No.3 is not in accordance

with law and also contrary to the guidelines laid down by a Division

Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Andhra

Pradesh Adimajati Seva Sangham v. Guntur Municipal Council1.

3. Mr. N. Praveen Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, on

instructions, would submit that the petitioners have left their pigs on

the streets, and as the moving of the pigs irregularly will result in

speared of contagious diseases, the people of the localities, made

. AIR 1987 AP 193

complaints, and considering the same, respondent No.3 - Municipality

directed the petitioners to take necessary steps to contain the pigs to

the specified areas allocated for the said purpose, but they did not

heed to their directions and were adamant, and, therefore, left with no

other option, respondent No.3 entrusted the job of catching pigs to the

agencies to prevent the spread of contagious diseases, and the said

action cannot be found fault with, especially in the present COVID-19

pandemic. Therefore, he submits that no exception can be taken to the

impugned action.

4. The learned Standing Counsel further submits that the

erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the States of

Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.3140 of 2015 dated

23.02.2015 disposed of the writ petition following the earlier common

order of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in

W.P.No.23871 of 1999 and batch dated 28.11.2000, which relied on

its Division Bench Judgment in Andhra Pradesh Adimajati Seva

Sangham1, and hence similar order may be passed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute the

same.

6. In that view of the matter and for the reasons alike in the

common order dated 28.11.2000 in W.P.No.23871 of 1999 and batch,

this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid common

order. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no

order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the

present writ petition shall stand closed.

_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 27th October, 2021 Note: Registry to annex a copy of Common Order dated 28.11.2000 in W.P.No.23871 of 1999 (B/O.) Mgr