ORDER:

Heard Sri Jalli Kanakaiah, learned senior designated counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R. Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Circular No.50/2016 in compelling the petitioner to purchase the Bisleri Water bottles from a particular distributor nominated by the corporation at very higher rates than that of the market rate and compelling the petitioner to sell only the water bottles of Bisleri company is illegal and arbitrary and null and void and violation of Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to sell the water bottles of all the recognized, reputed companies including the Bisleri Company and allowing the petitioner to carry on his business as usual and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. This Court vide its order dated 14.11.2017 passed in W.P.M.P.No.47521 of 2017 in W.P.No.38272 of 2017 observed as under :

“It is stated by learned counsel for petitioner that in similar circumstances, the Hon’ble Division Bench has granted interim orders in WAMP No.1176 of 2017 in W.A.No.581 of 2017 & batch dated 04.05.2017 and same is not disputed by Sri A.Ravi Babu, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3. For the reasons alike in the aforesaid order dated 04.05.2017, the petitioners shall be permitted, on payment of additional license fees, to sell water bottles of reputed brands with ‘BIS’ and ‘FSSAI’ certification in addition to sale of genuine Bisleri water bottles which they may, at their choice, procure either from the market or from the authorized dealer at the bus stations. This interim arrangement shall remain in force only till the existing license period of the petitioner herein end, or till the disposal of the writ petition, whichever is earlier. It is made clear that, in case any of the licensees including the petitioner, found to be selling spurious water bottles or water bottles without ‘BIS’ and ‘FSSAI’ certification, it would be open to the respondent-Corporation to take action against them in accordance with law, including cancellation of their licenses. ”

4. Sri R. Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the aw ard of licence to the petitioner to run Fruit, Fruit Juice and Cool Drinks in open space 6’ x 6’ OBS at Mancherial Bus Station is for the period from 03.09.2014 to 02.09.2019. Since, the said period had expired, the cause in the present w rit petition does not survive for adjudication, any more.

5. The said submission made by Sri R. Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents is not disputed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Bringing the said submission of both the learned counsel on record, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. How ever, there shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.

__________________________ MRS JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 30.10.2024 Dsu