IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13883 of 2008 Between: Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act having its Branch Office at Road, Green Lands, Hyderabad -16. and Registered Office at 7th-8th Floor, IFCI Tower 61, Nehru Place, New Delhi, Through its Attorney Mr. C. Girdhar Road ... PETITIONER AND 1 Municipal Corporation Of Warangal Warangal Rep by its Commissioner 2 The Additional Commissioner (ADVT)., Advertisement Section, Municipal Corporation of Warangal Warangal, Warangal District. 3 Mahendra Fashions, Having its Office at Door N. 4-9-128 Chowrasta, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate order/orders, direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in not considering the oral reply given by the petitioner and delegating the power of collection of fees to Respondent No. 3, and further the authority of Respondent No. 3 in issuing the notice and demanding the fees from the petitioner as without jurisdiction illegal and further the notice issued by Respondent No. 3 as null and void and not binding on the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. P. BHASKAR Counsel for Respondents: Mr. V. DURGA NAGESWARA RAO The Court made the following: Order: This writ petition has been filed by Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, with a prayer to issue appropriate order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Municipal Corporation of Warangal – 1st respondent and Additional Commissioner (Advt.), Advertisement Section, Municipal Corporation of Warangal – 2nd respondent, in not considering the oral reply given by the petitioner and delegating the power of collection of fees to Mahendra Fashions, Hanamkonda – 3rd respondent, as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The 3rd respondent issued a demand notice dated 18.01.2008 to the petitioner to pay Rs.2,750/- towards charges for displaying the signboard No.B-(1) for the period from 01.10.2007 to 31.03.2008. Another demand notice came to be issued to the petitioner on 19.06.2008 to arrange for payment of tax. It is the contention of the petitioner that the signboards put up by it do not come under the purview of advertisement and, therefore, no fee is required to be paid. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondents 1 and 2 did not consider the representation made by the petitioner and, therefore, necessary direction is required to be given to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation before taking any coercive action pursuant to the demand notice issued by the 3rd respondent. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that no representation so far has been made by the petitioner. 6. The 3rd respondent has been conferred power by the Municipal Corporation to collect the tax. If it is the case of the petitioner that the signboards put up by it do not come under the purview of advertisement, it has to make a representation and invite orders thereof. There seems to be no written representation submitted by the petitioner to the respondents 1 and 2. In similar circumstances, a single Judge of this Court in his order, dated 28.05.2008, in W.P.No.11267 of 2008, directed the petitioner therein to submit a detailed representation, so as to enable the Corporation to take appropriate decision. 7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Warangal, Warangal, on or before 14.07.2008. Thereupon, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Warangal, Warangal, shall take appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two weeks thereafter. No order as to costs. ________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 1st July, 2008. IBL