Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J.
Sangam Milk Producers Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 2605 of 2020
Decided On : 28-02-2020
Constitution of India, Article 226 -Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the action of the first respondent in issuing impugned notice declare the same as illegal and contrary to the proceedings in Roc. and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set-aside the impugned proceedings – Held, Though permission was granted for sale of 100 water bottles, still the respondent complained that sale of water bottles is contrary to the license. This contention is totally contrary to the terms and conditions of the proceedings dated 12.02.2005, by which, initially the petitioner was inducted as a licensee -sale of cool drinks, there is absolutely no material. Therefore, the respondent appears to have passed this order to put an end to the license granted in favour of this petitioner, obviously for the reasons best known to it. Hence, the order impugned in the writ petition is liable to be set-aside, not only on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, as mandated under Condition No. 18 of the annexure to the proceedings dated 22.12.2009 and Deed of License dated 17.02.2010, besides the unsubstantiated allegations - Impugned order is liable to be set-aside, while declaring the same as illegal and arbitrary - Writ petition is allowed
Facts of the Case:
First respondent allotted sale point at Tirumala for sale of milk and milk products. The application submitted by the petitioner along with other diaries was placed before the Board of Trustees, T.T.D. for taking decision in the matter. The Board of Trustees passed Resolution No. 463 dated 21.12.2004, resolved to agree in principle to allot sale points on payment of royalty based on turn over of business of dairy. Pursuant to resolution, the first respondent accorded permission of sale point to the petitioner. As per the proceedings dated 02.02.2005, the turn over of milk and milk products quoted by the petitioner is 3000 ltrs of milk, 100 sachets of 200 ml butter milk, 10 boxes of doodpeda, 12 ltrs of ghee, 50 bottles of 200 ml sterilized flavoured milk, 12 ltrs of mango packets, tetra pack milk 12 ltrs, 100 bottles of water, sweet lassi, basundi. After being satisfied, the proposal of the petitioner was accepted in the meeting held by the Estate Officer, T.T.D. Tirumala on 29.01.2005 and the proceedings of the first respondent are placed on record with this petition for perusal of this Court
Finding of the Court:
first respondent allotted sale point at Tirumala for sale of milk and milk products. The application submitted by the petitioner along with other diaries was placed before the Board of Trustees, T.T.D. for taking decision in the matter. The Board of Trustees passed Resolution No. 463 dated 21.12.2004, resolved to agree in principle to allot sale points on payment of royalty based on turn over of business of dairy. Pursuant to resolution, the first respondent accorded permission of sale point to the petitioner. As per the proceedings dated 02.02.2005, the turn over of milk and milk products quoted by the petitioner is 3000 ltrs of milk, 100 sachets of 200 ml butter milk, 10 boxes of doodpeda, 12 ltrs of ghee, 50 bottles of 200 ml sterilized flavoured milk, 12 ltrs of mango packets, tetra pack milk 12 ltrs, 100 bottles of water, sweet lassi, basundi. After being satisfied, the proposal of the petitioner was accepted in the meeting held by the Estate Officer, T.T.D. Tirumala on 29.01.2005 and the proceedings of the first respondent are placed on record with this petition for perusal of this Court
Result: writ petition is allowed
JUDGMENT :
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J.
1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the action of the first respondent in issuing impugned notice vide File No. T.T.D. 81021(31)/166/2019-Rev.TML dated 28.01.2020, declare the same as illegal and contrary to the proceedings in Roc. No. Rev.1/1188/AEO (Rev) TML/2002 dated 02.02.2005 and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set-aside the impugned proceedings vide File No. T.T.D. 81021(31)/166/2019-Rev.TML dated 28.01.2020.
2. On request of the petitioner vide letter dated 04.09.2005, the first respondent allotted sale point at Tirumala for sale of milk and milk products. The application submitted by the petitioner along with other diaries was placed before the Board of Trustees, T.T.D. for taking decision in the matter. The Board of Trustees passed Resolution No. 463 dated 21.12.2004, resolved to agree in principle to allot sale points on payment of royalty based on turn over of business of dairy. Pursuant to resolution, the first respondent accorded permission of sale point to the petitioner. As per the proceedings dated 02.02.2005, the turn over of milk and milk products quoted by the petitioner is 3000 ltrs of milk, 100 sachets of 200 ml butter milk, 10 boxes of doodpeda, 12 ltrs of ghee, 50 bottles of 200 ml sterilized flavoured milk, 12 ltrs of mango packets, tetra pack milk 12 ltrs, 100 bottles of water, sweet lassi, basundi. After being satisfied, the proposal of the petitioner was accepted in the meeting held by the Estate Officer, T.T.D. Tirumala on 29.01.2005 and the proceedings of the first respondent are placed on record with this petition for perusal of this Court.
3. After due enquiry, the first respondent in its proceedings dated 05.03.2005 allotted site measuring 10 x 10 temporarily on the Northern side of C.R.O. on payment of royalty for stock cum sale point. In continuation of proceedings dated 05.03.2005, the first respondent renewed the license for one year with effect from 01.04.2006 to 31.03.2007. Thereafter, on consideration of representation of Managing Director of the petitioner dated 11.09.2009, the first respondent accorded permission to allot Shop Nos. 114 and 115. Accordingly, shops were allotted. The office of the first respondent issued proceedings dated 22.12.2009 vide Roc. No. Rev.1/427/ARO (Rev)/TRN/1/2005 dated 22.12.2009 allotting Shop Nos. 114 and 115. The two shops were allotted to the petitioner on payment @ Rs. 1,450/- per month, per shop, as a sale point on par with other shops at H.T. Complex with 10% hike on the rent for every financial year on usual terms and conditions in the annexure, apart from payment of Royalty. The copy of the proceedings dated 22.12.2009 and its annexure is filed along with the petition. The proceedings dated 22.12.2009 and its annexure of the deed of license dated 17.02.2010 does not contain restriction on period of license/license tenure.
4. It is also contended that the first respondent issued the impugned proceedings, as if the petitioner was selling cool drinks and water bottles, in addition to Sangam Dairy products, and also without issuing any notice and affording an opportunity to rebut those allegations made against this petitioner in the impugned proceedings. The other allegation is that, some hawkers basket is in front portion of the shop. The representations submitted to Chairman, T.T.D. on 26.12.2018 and 16.02.2019 indicates that the shops are situated at H.T. Complex where the movement of pilgrims is very low. The petitioner is not able to serve large number of pilgrims and requested to re-locate the shop. It is also brought to the notice that peak period to sell the milk is in early hours and thereafter, as there is no movement of pilgrims at the place where the shops are situated and the allegation that there is basket in front of t
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
