SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 62579

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
M.A. Saleem S/o. M.A. Azeez – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana represented by its – Respondent
WP 31771/2015



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

28th November, 2025 Between:

M.A.Saleem and Others … Petitioners AND the State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary to the Home Department, Secretaraiat Buildings, Hyderabad and 6 others …Respondents

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any steps for constituting a town vending committee in the area of behind APSRTC bus stand and beside APSRTC bus depot of Nizamabad and not issuing the certificates to the petitioners enabling them to do their street vending business by implementing the provisions of Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street vending) Act, 2014, and threatening the petitioners that, they shall not do their petty business in the said area, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, direct the respondents to constitute a Town Vending Committee in the area of behind APSRTC bus stand and beside APSRTC bus depot of Nizamabad, and issue appropriate certificates to the petitioners enabling them to do their petty business in the said place...”

2. Heard Mr. K. Sai Krishna, learned counsel representing K.Venu Madhav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Sridhar Bhuvanagiri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to

3.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cause of action in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication and, therefore, seeks dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home raises no objection to the said submission.

5. Recording the submissions of both learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________________ JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Date: 28.11.2025 NIT Date: 28.11.2025 NIT

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top