Dismissed

A. Venkatesh, Chittoor Dist. v. Ttd.,Tirupati, Chittoor Dist.,and 3 Otrs.

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Sept 2021WP/8647/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed five writ petitions filed by a hawker challenging the allotment of a taxi counter. Since the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam had already initiated eviction proceedings against the allottee, the Court found no lis survived and dismissed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed.

A. Venkatesh, Chittoor Dist. Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION Nos.7596 of 2021, 12049 of 2019, 23768 of 2015, 24133 of 2018 & 8647 of 2014

¶3

COMMON ORDER:

¶4

The same writ petitioner has filed all the writ

¶5

petitions.

¶6

Heard Sri. P.R.K. Amarendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.7596 of 2021, Sri Rajendra Bussa, learned counsel appearing for petitioners in W.P.Nos.12049 of 2019, 23768 of 2015, 24133 of 2018 & 8647 of 2014 and Sri A. Prabhakar Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam, in all the writ petitions.

¶7

The sum and substance of the contentions of the writ petitioner is that the allotment of vacant half portion of prepaid taxi counter, in the eastern side of 2^nd Mandapam (PAC-II) on shifting basis to one Smt. K. Lakshmamma, should be cancelled and subsequent attempts of one Smt. A. Shanthamma, on the demise of Smt. K. Lakshmamma, to obtain transfer of this allotment in her favour should not be permitted.

¶8

It is the case of the petitioner that he is a hawker on Tirumala Hills and would get an opportunity to participate in the auction process of the lease hold rights of this shop, if the shops are resumed by the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam. The locus of the writ petitioner, in filing of these writ petitions, on such a speculative basis, is highly suspect.

¶9

¶10

In any event, it is submitted by Sri A. Prabhakar Sarma, that the original allotment of the shop in favour of K. Lakshamma, was cancelled by the proceedings of Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam in

¶11

Roc.No.Rev2/90/AEO(P& R)/Tml/2012, dated 29.06.2020. This order of cancellation was challenged by Smt. A.Shanthamma, by way of W.P.No.11995 of 2020, before this Court, and the same was allowed and the order of cancellation was set aside. Subsequently, the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam, has again initiated proceedings, for eviction of Smt.A. Shanthamma.

¶12

In these circumstances, no lis survives in the present writ petition, as the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam has already initiated the process of eviction of Smt. A.Santhamma.

¶13

Accordingly the writ petitions are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶14

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶15

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

¶16

04.09.2021 BSM

¶17

¶18

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶19

WRIT PETITION Nos.7596 of 2021, 12049 of 2019, 23768 of 2015, 24133 of 2018 & 8647 of 2014

¶20

04-09-2021

¶21

BSM

A. Venkatesh, Chittoor Dist. v. Ttd.,Tirupati, Chittoor Dist.,and 3 Otrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Venkatesh, Chittoor Dist. v. Ttd.,Tirupati, Chittoor Dist.,and 3 Otrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bapuram Venkat Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra pradesh

Sanapala Leela Madhavudu Vs Sri Varaha Lakshminarasimha Swamy vari Devasthanam

Mr. T. Ramakrishna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

A.Venkatesh, Vs Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam

A.Venkatesh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

L.Rajaneesh Vs P. Ramesh Kumar, I.a.S, (Rtd)