APHC010480302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25098/2025 Between: 1. GODATHU RAJU BABU, S/O. PRAKASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.4-108, PEDDA VEEDHI, YELESWARAM TOWN KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 2. GODATHA PRAKASHA RAO, S/O. SATTIYYA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.4-108, PEDDA VEEDHI, YELESWARAM TOWN, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 3. GODATHA SATTI BABU, S/O. PRAKASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.5-502, VENGALA RAO COLONY, YELESWARAMTOWN, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 4. RACHARLA SARASWATHI DEVI, W/O. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.4-108, PEDDA VEEDHI, YELESWARAM TOWN, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 5. BOORA NAGAMANI, W/O. KIRAN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.4-116/A, PEDDA VEEDHI, YELESWARAMTOWN KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA DISTRICT, KAKINADA. 2 3. YELESWARAM NAGAR PANCHAYAT, REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER, YELESWARAM TOWN, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in preventing the Petitioners from selling buffalo meat in Yeleswaram Nagar Panchayat, Kakinada District without issuing assigning any reason, without issuing any prior notice and without following due process of law District as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, against the principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and direct the Respondents to allow the Petitioners to continue their business of selling buffalo meat in Yeleswaram Nagar Panchayat, Kakinada District without causing any disturbances to the Petitioners and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass an interim order by directing the Respondents not to cause any troubles to the Petitioners from selling buffalo meat in Yeleswaram Nagar Panchayat, Kakinada District to earn their livelihoods for maintaining themselves and their families, until disposal of the above writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25098/2025 The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri G. Kiran babu, learned counsel representing Sri Srinivasa Rao Narra, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3. 2. It is contended that the petitioners are engaged in the business of buying and selling of buffalo meat. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents are not allowing them to operate their business of purchasing and selling of meat. 3. It is contended that the said business has been operating for twenty years, and throughout this period, there has been no disruption from the respondents. However, for the first time, the petitioners were not allowed to do business. In this connection, the petitioners have already filed a representation with the respondent No. 2, District Collector. However the same has not yet been considered. 4. As per the Writ Affidavit, the allegation is against the respondent No.3 that they are interfering with the conduct of the said business, however the representation is stated to have been made to the 2nd respondent. Having regard to the submissions advanced, this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition granting liberty to the petitioners to file a representation before the respondent No.3. Upon filing of such 4 representation, the respondent No.3 is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners. In the meanwhile, if any action is proposed against the petitioners, the same shall be in accordance with law. 5. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 19.09.2025 MSI 5 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25098/2025 Date: 19.09.2025 MSI