IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 10997 of 2009 Between: M/s. Vodafone Essar South LImited, 6th Floor, varun Towers II, Begumpet Hyderabad500 016. Rep. by its General Manager (Legal) ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 . .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the action of the respondents in threatening to take coercive steps for removal of the boards erected by the petitioner company at its business place, shops etc. without giving opportunity whatsoever and action of the respondent as arbitrary, illegal and ultra virus to the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and in violation of the well settled principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.RAMA RAO GHANTA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10997 of 2009 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent-Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation in threatening to take coercive steps for removal of the boards erected by the petitioner company at its business place, shops etc., without giving any opportunity as arbitrary and illegal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent- Corporation. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties have brought to my notice that an identical issue has already been considered by this Court in W.P.No.5825 of 2006 and batch, dated 28.9.2006 and it was held that to attract the provisions of Section 421 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the Corporation must satisfy itself first that the provisions are attracted and hence the fee can be levied. This exercise has to be made in individual cases. Accordingly, this Court remitted the matter to the Corporation and gave opportunity to the writ petitioners to make their representations individually and the Corporation was directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Following the above said order, dated 28.9.2006, several other writ petitions were allowed by this Court, setting aside the impugned orders and granting liberty to the petitioners therein to make a representation to the Corporation. 4. Accordingly, following the order in W.P.No.5825 of 2006 and batch, dated 28.9.2006, the writ petition is allowed, at the stage of admission, and the impugned demand notice, dated 28.5.2009, is quashed. The petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the respondent-Corporation as early as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and, in which event, the same shall be considered by the Corporation and appropriate decision shall be taken in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ JUSTICE G.ROHINI 05-06-2009. Msr/Ivd THE HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10997 of 2009 05-06-2009 (Msr)