IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 3629 of 2009 Between: M/s. Vodafone Essar South Limited, 6th Floor, Varun Towers, II, Begumpet, Hyderabad - 500 016, Rep. by its General Manager (Finance). ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Chirala Municipality, Rep. by its Commissioner, Chirala, Prakasam District. 2 Tulasi Add Agency, Hari Prasad Nagar, 3-10-10(2), Chirala - 523 157, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus 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 1st Respondent in authorising the 2nd respondent to exercise the statutory power as arbitrary, illegal, and ultra virus to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 and in violation of the well settled principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.RAMA RAO GHANTA Counsel for the Respondents: MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.3629 of 2009 Order: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare 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 any opportunity whatsoever, as arbitrary and illegal and the action of the first respondent in authorizing the second respondent to exercise the statutory power, as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities appearing for the first respondent, have agreed and submitted that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment, dated 06.03.2007, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4172 of 2003 and batch, and another judgment in Kasturi Brothers, Dress Materials and Saree Shop, Hyderabad v. M.C.H.[1] In view of the submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to file a representation/objection, and on such representation/objection that may be filed by the petitioner, the first respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 25.02.2009 VGB [1] 2007 (1) ALD 481