THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No. 5398 of 2011 ORDER: It is represented by the learned counsel appearing on both sides that the cause in this writ petition is covered by the judgment rendered by this court in WP No. 3192 of 2011 dated 9.8.2011, wherein the following directions have been issued. “The petitioner, is therefore, entitled to raise objections to the proposal initiated by respondent No.2 under the impugned letter. The petitioner appeared to have already submitted its objections to the letter of respondent No.2 by making a copy to respondent No.1 on 7.2.2011. As no final decision on the proposal of respondent No.2 is taken by respondent No.1, the writ petition is premature. The petitioner is permitted to make a comprehensive representation to respondent No. 1 by raising relevant objections to the impugned letter, dated 29.1.2011, of respondent No.2, within two weeks from today. On receipt of such representation, respondent No.1 shall consider the same in the light of G.O. Ms. No.2, dated 9.1.2009, and take a decision on renewal/grant of fresh lease in favour of the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of such representation from the petitioner. Till expiry of the above mentioned period, the petitioner is permitted to pay the rents as envisaged in G.O. Ms. No.2, dated 9.1.2009. The amounts so paid shall be subject to the decision that may be taken by respondent No.1. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.” Subject to the same terms and conditions, this writ petition is also disposed of. No costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J knk 14th October 2011