ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, seeking to direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner of the lease hold premises bearing No.2-74, GNT Road, Near Old SBI, Gannavaram, Krishna District, without following due process of law, by declaring the high handed action of respondents 2 to 5 in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner of the said premises and causing hindrance to his business as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the premises bearing No.2- 74, GNT Road, near old SBI, Gannavaram, is owned by Mandava Sujatha, who purchased the same from B. Venkata Badra Chamundeswari Devi through a registered sale deed, dated 07.07.1995. At the time of purchase there existed a thatched hut and the same was developed by the owner by raising a temporary asbestos sheet shed. The said semi-permanent shed was in existence within the boundaries of the land belonging to the owner and the said semi- permanent shed was subsequently assessed by the Gram Panchayat and given D.No.2-74 and the petitioner took the said premises on lease from its owner by entering into a lease agreement for a period of 5 years commencing from 01-01-2017, which expires on 31-12-2022. As per the lease agreement, the petitioner has to make alterations of the existing semi permanent sheds to suit his business and accordingly made alterations to run his hotel business wherein he setup ‘Aathidi’ Restaurant, by obtaining all the necessary permissions to run the said business.

It is the further case of the petitioner that, there was no single complainant of whatsoever nature, from any department and same is being run in compliance of the requirement from all concerned departments, without any blemish record.

It is the further case of the petitioner that, the 6th respondent, who is envious and jealous of the petitioner business, approached politically and influenced the revenue authorities, who in turn started interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the premises without any sufficient cause and reason and without following due process of law. As such, the present Writ Petition is filed.

3. To the said Writ Petition, so far no counter has been filed by Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

4. The 6th respondent filed his counter along with an application to vacate the interim order, dated 05.01.2018, denying allegations, inter alia, contending that, the business, which is being run by the petitioner is without any permission and it is causing inconvenience to the 6th respondent and also to the other inmates of the neighbourhood, as such, he made a representation to the revenue authorities to take action.

It is further contended that, pursuant to the representation, the authorities have issued notice to the original owner, but no action has been taken pursuant to the same. The petitioner, being a lease holder of the subject premises and as the lease has expired by 31.12.2022, he has no locus to file the Writ Petition and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

5. Heard Sri G. Rama Chandra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.V. Mahesh, learned counsel for the 6th respondent, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri N. Srihari, Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner has taken the subject premises under a lease agreement from the original owner and running a restaurant, by name, ‘Aathidi’ Restaurant and the 6th respondent, who is neighbour, bore grudge against the petitioner and influenced the revenue authorities and trying to vacate the petitioner forcibly, without following due process of law. As such, present Writ Petition is filed.

Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that, this Court protected the interest of the petitioner by passing interim order, dated 05.01.2018 in I.A.