The High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. l ...Petitioners .. . Respondents Petition Under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lnd:a praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of tht-' Respondents in not taking action as per the Letter vide Lr.No. AMC/GUDI 2016-11 dt. 01.09.2018 issued following lhe GO Ms No.6 dt. 12.01.2011 as arbilrary, illegal, unreasonable, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the Respondents to allot the open spaces in Block No. 1 tc lj in the Gudimalkapur flower Market to the Petitioners. I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CpC praying that in the ci.cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to direct the Respondents to allot the open spaces in Gudimall<apur flower market in Block No. 1 to 5 by following GO Ms No.6 dt.12.O1.2O11, pending disposal of the writ petition

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI SOLIPURAM PRANAV RE:DDY Counsel for the Respondent No.'l : GP FOR AGRICULTURE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 : SRI P.SR|KANTH ,GOUD The Court made the following ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. ruSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.5T93 OF 2025 ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioners afe seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking action as per the letter vide Lr.No.AMC/GtJDl20l6-17 dt.01.09.2018 issued following G.O.Ms.No.l2.0l.20l 1 as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondents to allot the open spaces in Btock Nos.1 to 5 in the Gudimalkapur Flower Market to the petitioners and to pass such other order or orders'

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the petitioners are eking out their livelihood by making and selling garlands and they were members of Jambagh Poola Dandalu and Material Association in Jambagh market. In the year 2011, new flower market was established in Gudimalkapur and the flower trade was shifted from Jambagh market to Gudimalkapur market. The Government allotted the shops to the garland service providers. As per G.O'Ms'No'6, Agriculture and Cooperation (AM.II) Department, dt.12'01'2011, the ) W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 Government had allottcd 119 shops to commission agents, 78 shops to vendors and l2-5 shops to garland service providers. The petitioners claim that they havc bcen allotted open spaces in Block Nos.1 to 5 in the sketch map. I-lorvever, no allotment letters were issued in lavour of the petitioners. It is claimed that the petitioners have submitted several represcntations to thc respondents to allot the open spaces to them as per letter Lr.No.AMC/GIJD/2016-17 dt.O1.09.2018. However, without regularizing thc allotted open spaccs to the petitioners. thc respondents made efforts to evjct the petitioners lrom the allotted open spaces Therelbre, the peti1i11ng1. approachcd this Court by filing W.P.No.20208 of 2023 and this Ootrq vide orders dt.28.07 .2023, was pleased to direct the respondcnts not to interfcre with the possession o1- the petitioners. It is strbmitted that while matters stood thus, the respondents demolished the structures ol the petitioners and C.C.No.357 of 2023 was filed against such action before this Court and the s.ame is pending consideration by this Court. Ir is submitted that on 17.09.2024, the respondents did not allorv the petitioners to carry out their business and threatened thern to vacate the place through police officials and therefore, the petitioners have approached this (lourt and filed W.l'}No.28253 of 2024 and this Court, vide' interim orders 3 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 dt.04.10.2024, directed the police officials not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the respondents. Challenging the action of the respondents in not considering the representations of the petitioners to allot open spaces in Gudimalkapur Flower Market to the petitioners where the petitioners are in prolonged possession and are eking out their livelihood by carrying out flower business, as illegal and arbitrary, the present Writ Petition is filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the above submissions, has drawn the attention of this Court to various photographs filed along with the Writ Petition from pages.50 to 61 to demonstrate that the petitioners are in possession of the shops which have been erected in the front side of the market 4, Leamed Govemment Pleader for Agriculture and Cooperation, on the other hand, has relied upon the averments made in the counter afhdavit filed by respondent No.3 and submitted that initially when the market was shifted from Jambagh to Gudimalkapur, there was an open auction conducted to the service providers and only 65 members have participated in the open auction and out of 65 members, only 62 members quoted the upset price for the open space allotment in the , 4 W.P,No.5193 of 2025 flower market rnd all the 62 members were allotted open space duly concluding the agrecments and they have constnrcted sheds in the open space. It is subrnittcd that G.O.Ms.No.6, Agriculture and Cooperation (AM.II) Departrnent, dt.12.01.2011 was issued for allotment of 125 open spaces 10 the scrvice providers. To the paper notilication issued by the Market ('ommittec. Gudimalkapur for the remaining service providers, only 7 members responded and they were also allotted open space in thc floq,er market and a total of 69 servioe providers were allotted in the (iudimalkapur Flower Markel by the N{:rrket Committee. It is submitted that out of 69 service providers, 14 service providers werc allotted at the southem side of the flower market, i.e., next to the main gate and the rest 59 mcmbers were allotted on tlrr: northern side of the flower market, and subsequently, it carne to light that there is a heritage structure (well) on the southem side of the flower market and it was being obstructed by the shops of the l4 service pntviders who were beside the main gate at the well and that there rrzas heavy traffic congestion at 1hc: main gate, and in order to presorve the heritage structure from being damaged and also to maintain and preserve it, the 14 service providers along with 79 other illegal service providers who were causing lot of inconvenience and congestion to the traffic at the *t .. *-., -, .*L.i-;-. . -tJ=*.:"::#*--:: ,.--i-:rt*i3:.'* ' -,:i-:i:." - -.- 5 W.P.No.5l93 of2025 main gate, were removed from the southem side and they were reallotted to the northem side of the flower market where the other service providers are allotted. It is stated that this arrangement was done for removing the traffic hurdles and also to protect the heritage structure and to maintain uniformity among the service providers. It is stated that the 14 service providers who are the original allottees and the other 79 service providers who were in illegal occupation, were also removed vide Memo No.VIG/3712021 dt.20.05.2022 with the help and protection of the police. It is further stated that there was open space on the nofthem end of the flower market and therefore, there was proposal for allocating the said place to the service providers and that the Government, after careful consideration of the proposal, has accorded pemission to allocate the said space to the service providers who were removed from the main gate and the heritage structure (well) and the said Memo also accorded permission to consider the new representations made by the service providers up to 10.05.2023 and, the 79 illegal service providers whose structures were removed vide Memo d1.20.05.2022 were also reallocated on the northem side of the flower market along with the 14 original seruice providers who were earlier allotted place near the main gate and near the heritage well. It is stated f 6 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 that all this infbrmation \vas brought to the notice of this Court in the counter affidavit filed in W.P.No.571 of 2024., i.e., abotrt the removal of the stnrctures lionr thc main gate and heritage structure. llowever, the illegal occupants, i.c., 33 members out of 79 members filed W.P.No.28253 of 2024 praying this Court to direct the respondent police not to interfere in the civil disputes between th,: petitioners and the Agriculturai Market Committee in respect of the shops and business of the petitioners at the Agricultural Market Committet:, Gudimalkapur Another Writ l)etition, i.e., W.P.No.l62 ol 2025 was also filed before this Court b1 9 other persons. Thus, accordin6. to the learned Govemment Plcader, the writ petitioners have occupie<l the space in the Gudimalkapur Ilower market at the main entrancc and at thc heritage structurc (well) without any authority of law and witlxrut any allotment made to thenr at that particular place and therelbre, when the respondents tricd to remove thc same with the help cl the police, they have approached this Court and have obtained interirn orders not to interferc. It is submitted that the illegal occupants were already evicted by the process of iaw and they cannot now take law into their hands and make temporarv structures and seek protection of this (lourt 7 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025

5. The leamed counsel for the petitioners, however, relied upon the averrnents in the writ affidavit and lurther relied upon the directions of this Court in W.P.No.571 of 2024 and submitted that the case of the petitioners also be directed to be considered by the respondents as was directed in the case of the petitioners therein

6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the entire issue is with regard. to the occupation of the petitioners on the southem side of the Gudimalkapur Flower Market, i.e., near the main gate. While the petitioners are claiming to be in rightful possession of the same and are seeking allotment of the spaces to them, the respondents submit that the open spaces which were initially allotted to 14 rnembers and the open spaces which were illegally occupied by 79 mernbers, have all been removed and the present writ petitioners have erected temporary construction illegally with the help of political representatives without any authority of law and therefore, they have to be evicted. This Court, while disposing of W.P.No.571 of 2024, has taken note of the allotment of stalls on the north-west side of Gudimalkapur Market in respect of the occupants of shops on the northem side of the market and the respondents have f,rled counter affidavit, wherein they have mentioned about the illegal I 8 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 i occupancy c.ll'structures on thc southem side of the rnarket and also removal of l4 scn,ice providers who were allotted on the southern side and the other illegal occupants in order to protect thr: herilage well. It was also mentioned that the illegal structures have been demolished and removed by the authorities. Even from the photographs filed atong with the counter a fficlavit, it is evident that the shops wer.e removed by the respondents. 1-he photograph filed at page 49 of the counter affidavit and the photognrph filed at page 50 of the Writ Petition both show that there is a water tank and there were no shops in front of the water tank in the photograph filed at page 49 of the counter atTidavit, while the shops are available in front of the water tank. The photographs filcd along with the counter atfidavit show that structurcs have been erected in the said placc. T'hercfore, it is evident that after demolition of the structures by thc respondents, the petitioners have ,:r.ected temporary structures afresh and arc in occupation of the same. The petitioners cannot take the law into their hands and occupy the open spaces. In W.P.No.571 ot 2024, this Court has already observed thar it is the prerogative ol'the (iovemment to allot stalls/space icr carrying on the business to the eligible allottees and in the case of the petitioncrs herein, only such of thc 14 persons who had been allotted the space on the I I I i i I I I i 9 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 southern side of the market, have right to claim that they should be allotted altemative space if they have to be vacated because of the existence of heritage well. But the other petitioners, who are illegal occupants and were evicted from the market, cannot seek a right to be considered for allotment. This Court had observed that for the benefit of new entrants into the market, shifting of the petitioners therein who have been in the market yard since 2Ol'1 , is not in accordance with equity or compliance with the principtes of natural justice and therefore, directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to make their submissions and consider the same before taking any decision for development of the I I market. 7, In view of the same, this Court directs the respondents to consider the representations ofthe 14 service providers (ifthey are the petitioners herein) who were initially allotted the space at the southern side of the flower market and accommodate them in any other altemative site expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, they cannot claim to remain at the gate as a matter of right. In respect ofthe other petitioners, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the action to be taken by the respondent authorities. The respondents are therefore at liberty to seek protection of l0 W.P.No.5l93 of 2025 the police, if necessarw, lbr ensuring that the illegal strur:tures erected by all the petitioners herein are removed from the main gate of the Gudimalkapur Market Yard

8. With the above directions, the Wrir Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

9. Pending rniscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Stit petition shall stand closed. SD/.M EPUTY OHD. ISMAIL REGISTRAR /R //TRUE COPY// \J. - \j SECTION OFFICER The Principal Secretary, Agricultural Marketing Departmr:nt' Secretariat State of Telangana at HYderabad ' The Commissioner and Dilctor of Agricultural Marketirg' Door No 36 184' iir""l rl" r i. urdu Galli, Himayat Nagar' Government of relangana' The Special craoe Secretaf , Agiit'li"ir, N'larket Cornnrittee' Gudimalkapur Flowei Market. Gudimalkapur, HVO9gU.a.!'. Court for thre State of Telangana . Two CCs to GP FOR ncniCUr-iUnE 'High . One CC to SRI SOLIPURAM PRANAV REDDY' Advoc;ate [OPUCI at HYderabad [OUTI 5;; ca io inr p.snrrnNTH GouD, Advocate (oPUC) - Two CD CoPies To 1

2. 3 4 E 6 7 SA HIGH COURT DATED:0410412025 ORDER WP.No.5193 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. ///z ,/4/25 7 0I trn Zti: \< 'l-'-., - - , ---.-:'-' 2