LAWS(APH)-2014-12-96

OBILI KUSUMAR Vs. GOVT OF A P

Decided On December 27, 2014
Obili Kusumar Appellant
V/S
GOVT OF A P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein was a successful bidder with respect to one of the shops notified by the 4th respondent at Gazette Sl.No.162 for Mantada village, Krishna District. He was granted provisional licence on 01 -07 -2014 and has been carrying on business at Mantada, Vuyyuru Mandal, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. The petitioner questions relocation of one of the shops in respect of Gazette Serial No.168, which was originally located at Mudunuru Village to Gopavanipalem on various grounds as detailed hereunder.

(2.) THE petitioner states in his affidavit that out of 173 shops notified in Machilipatnam Division, 24 shops remained unsold and the 4th respondent issued Notification, dated 25 -07 -2014 inviting bids for 22 undisposed shops and on the same day by another Gazette Notification No.32/2014, the proposed Shop at Gopavanipalem was notified. The petitioner challenges the relocation of the said Shop at Gopavanipalem on the ground that it is at a distance of two kilometres from his shop. Therefore, he submits that relocation of Shop at Gopavanipalem would seriously affect the petitioner.

(3.) SRI O.Manohar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has raised two specific contentions based on Rule 4 as well as Rule 16 (9) of the A.P.Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Learned counsel submits that under Rule 4 of the Rules, the Commissioner is required to examine requirement of public order, health, safety and other factors as he thinks fit and would thereupon fix the number of shops to be established in an area/locality and then Notification under Rule 5 of the Rules has to be published. Rule 4 of the Rules has been amended under G.O.Ms.No.357, dated 22 -06 -2013 by adding the following sentence to Rule 4 of the Rules and may relocate any undisposed shops from any area/locality as he thinks fit. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, contends that while initially fixing the number of shops in an area/locality, the Commissioner has to take into consideration all the factors such as public order, health, safety and other factors and the said requirement is also required to be fulfilled while ordering relocation of a shop from notified location to any location.