THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.7325 of 2011 ORDER: The grandfather of the petitioner was accorded permission by the then Guntur Municipality to construct a theatre upon the terrace of an existing building of Amaravathi Road, Guntur District. An agreement to this effect was entered into on 24.10.1980. The duration of the lease is 20 years. The agreement provided that on termination of the lease, the lessee shall handover the building constructed by him together the permanent fittings, such as doors and windows etc, but shall be entitled to remove the furniture and other machinery. The lease came to an end in the year 2000 and efforts made by the lessee to continue the lease did not fructify. The grandfather of the petitioner is said to be no more. The Municipality, which has since been upgraded as Corporation, has issued a notification dated 17.03.2011, proposing to conduct auction for the work of demolition of the building and retrieval of the material such as the steel, asbestos sheets, iron, furniture and machinery etc., in the theatre. The petitioner submitted a representation on 18.03.2011 stating that the furniture and machinery cannot be put to auction and that he be delivered possession thereof. The grievance of the petitioner is that no steps have been taken on the representation. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the Corporation. It is not in dispute that there existed a lease in favour of the grandfather of the petitioner and on the basis of the same, a cinema theatre was constructed. Though the Municipal Council passed a resolution for continuing the lease subject to certain terms, the Government is said to have set aside the same. The result was that the possession of the theatre was taken on 12.09.2001 under a panchanama. As many as 18 items of movable property such as projectors, fans, chairs etc., were appended to the panchanama. It appears that on account of the proper pursuit of the matter, the possession thereof was not taken. the Corporation does not lay any claim of ownership vis-à-vis the said items. Even now they can be delivered to the petitioner, unless there is any rival claim from any legal descendant of the original lessee. Hence, the writ petition is partly allowed directing that the impugned notification shall not cover the items of property mentioned in the panchanama, and the Corporation shall be under obligation to deliver the possession thereof to the petitioner in their existing condition. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.22.03.2011. GJ