JUDGMENT :

Ninala Jayasurya, J.

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 21399 of 2020, the 2nd and 3rd respondents therein filed the present appeal.

2. By the order under assailment, the learned Single Judge while holding inter alia that the action of the appellants in evicting the writ petitioner/1st respondent on 15.11.2020 a Sunday, from the subject matter premises, by issuing a communication purportedly a "Vacation Notice" dated 14.11.2020 is not as per the procedure established by Law, directed redelivery of possession.

3. Heard Mr. S. Sri Ram, learned Advocate General, appearing for Mr. Kasa Jagan Mohanreddy, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. S. Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the 1st respondent/writ petitioner.

4. The writ petitioner/1st respondent's case as projected in writ petition, in brief, is thus:

Pursuant to invitation of applications for allotment of Drive-In-Restaurant situated at Gurajada Kalakshetram bearing Door No.11-1-7 in T.S. No.1018, Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam District (hereinafter referred to as 'premises') by Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) (presently Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority-VMRDA), the petitioner being the highest bidder was allotted the premises vide R.C. No. 3130/2003/1-3 dated 05.03.2003 for a period of 9 years. The petitioner was put in possession of the premises and raised some constructions, after obtaining necessary permissions. As the term of license would expire by 10.07.2012, the petitioner requested the authorities to extend the license vide letter dated 11.08.2011 for a period of 33 years. However, a Vacation Notice was issued on 01.05.2012 which led to filing of a civil suit as also a writ petition. Ultimately, VUDA took possession of the premises on 14.05.2014, but vide proceedings Rc. No. 3130/2003/1-3 dated 08.07.2015, VUDA extended the license period in favour of the petitioner by one more term i.e., for 9 years from 2015 to 2024.

5. Against the background of the above stated position, it is pleaded in the writ petition that the 2nd and 3rd respondents/appellants, sought to vacate the writ petitioner by issuing a notice vide R.C. No. 3130/2003/1-3 dated 14.11.2020 styled as Vacation notice on the premise that certain irregularities were observed by the Government in its Letter No. 21646/H2/2011 dated 14.11.2020 under reference 2nd cited in the notice, in granting extension of license/lease to the writ petitioner. It is on the basis of the said purported notice, the writ petitioner alleged that the officials of the appellants/2nd and 3rd respondents along with the police personnel on 15.11.2020 in the morning hours at 5-00 a.m., entered the premises in question, removed the articles and put up a seal to the gate in a high-handed and arbitrary manner and the same is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from principles of natural justice.

6. The appellants/2nd and 3rd respondents filed a detailed counter-affidavit inter alia admitting the factum of extension of license and the relevant averments at para Nos. 11 and 12 read thus :

"11. While so, M/s. Fusion Foods i.e., petitioner herein submitted a representation to the Government (MA & UD Department) on 03.09.2014 to allow him to continue as a licensee in the schedule premises with new terms and the Government forwarded the same to the then Vice Chairman, VUDA to furnish remarks to the Government for taking further necessary action vide Letter No. 12297/H2/2014 dt. 05.09.2014. It was decided to grant license for the schedule premises in favour of M/s. Fusion Foods for one more term i.e., 9 years vide proceedings Rc. 3130/2003/3 dt. 08.07.2015.

12. Upon the queries raised by the Government with regard to grant of license for the schedule premises from 08.07.2015 to 07.07.2024 vide Letters of the Government on 03.02.2017 and 26.10.2017, the then Vice Chairman, VUDA informed the Government vide Lette