IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7329 of 2009 Between: M/s.Deccan Opticals & Allied Industries Pvt Ltd., 3-6-337 Basheerbagh, Hyderabad rep.by its Managing Director Manish Kapoor S/o.M.L.Kapoor,R/o.Begumpet, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad 2 The Addl. Commissioner (Advt), Advertisement Section GHMC., Tank Bund, Hyderabad 3 USM Business Systems Pvt Ltd., (Authorised Advertisement Fee Collection Agent of GHMC), Bo 1-8-319/2, Patigadaa Road,Behind For Showroom Begumpet, Secunderabad-500003 .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declare the action of the respondents in treating the name board erected by the petitioner on its premises as an advertisement within the meaning of section 421 r/w, 622 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and consequently demanding the advertisement fee vide the impugned Notice dated 12.1.2009 No.245/AD!/Advt/GHMC/2008-09 as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the said impugned Notice dated 12.l1.2009 issued by they 3rd respondent being the collection agent of 1st and 2nd respondetns in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SHIV KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE WRIT PETITION NO : 7341 of 2009 Between: Tirumala Mens Exclusive, 16-11-740/4, Shop No.11, Vanijya Vihar, Dilsukh Nagar, Hyderabad. Rep by its Partner K.Jagadiswar, S/o. Late Narasimhulu, aged about 40 years, R/o. 22-12-196, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Special Officer & Commissioner, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad., 2 The Additional Commissioner, Advertisement, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund Road,Hyderabad. 3 U.S.M. Business Systems Private Limited, 1-8-319/2, Patigadda Road, Behind Ford Showroom, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, Order or direction more fparticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents, in issuing thenotices on 03.04.2009 vide proceedings No.245/AD1/Advt/GHMC/2008-2009 in serial No.16069 under Section 421 R/w section 622 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 treating the name Board/board frames fixed by the Petitioner on the parapet wall of its business place and consequently demanding the fee for the same is ilelgal, arbitrary, capricious and in violation of the principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIHARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 WRIT PETITION NO : 7344 of 2009 Between: 1 Srinivasa Needs, S.S.R. Vijetha Rayal Empire, 16-11-741/C/13, Moosarambagh, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. Rep by its Partner, K. Balakrishna S/o. Late Chandrasekhar aged about 40 years, R/o. Plot No. 269, Road No. 40, R/o. Plot No. 269, Road No. 9, Vasavi Colony, R.K. Puram, Hyderabad. 2 Vasireddy Swagruha Foods, Opp : Mamatha Narsing Home, KPHB, IV Phase, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 3 Vasireddy Swagruha Foods, GP, Sunny Enclave, Nizamabad Road, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 4 Ruchi Catering, Plot No. 311, Vivekananda Nagar Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. all petitioners rep by its Proprietor, Sri Chava Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Narayana, Aged 45, R/o. Plot No. 117, Mythri Nagar Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Special Officer & Commissioner, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Additional Commissioner, Advertisement, The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 3 U.S.M. Business Systems Private Ltd, 1-8-319/2, Patigadda Road, Behind Ford Showroom, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the notices dated 01-4-2009 vide Proceedings No. 245/AD1/Advt/GHMC/2008-2009 in serial No. 13822 under section 421 R/w section 622 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 treating the name Board/Board frames fixed by the petitioner on the parapet wall of its Business place and consequently demanding the fee for the same is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIHARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 WRIT PETITION NO : 7350 of 2009 Between: Rajesh Dadu S/o. Sudershan Dadu Dadu Mithai Vatika, JADE Arcade, Opp. Paradise Hotel, M.G. Road, Secunderabad - 500 003. R/o. 3-6-369/B/3/1, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Addl. Commissioner (Advertisement) G.H. Municipal Corporation Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad - 500 063. 2 M/s. USM Business Systems (P) Ltd. Authorised Advertisement Fee Collection Agent of G.H.M.C. 1-8-319/2, Patigadda Road, Behind Ford Showroom, Begumpet, Secunderabad - 500 003. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ declaring the Impugned Notice No.245/AD1/Advt/GHMC-2008-09 dt. 25- 2-2009 served on the Petitioner on 2-4-2009 as illegal, and demanding the advertisement fee with regard to sign Board fixed on the business premises at Dadu's Mithai Vatika, Jade Arcade, Opp. Paradise Hotel, M.G. Road, Secunderabad, as ultravires and unjustified and arbitrary and set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.GANESH RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE WRIT PETITION NO : 7351 of 2009 Between: M/s. Swathi Tiffins & Coffee Shop 3-5-872/1, Old MLA Quarters, Hyderguda, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Partner Sri N. Krishna Murthy, S/o. N.K. Venkat Rao, Aged about 68 Years, R/o. 27, Gunrock Enclave, Kharkhana, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Special Officer & Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad., 2 The Additional Commissioner, Advertisement, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 3 Advertisement Inspector, Circle-9, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents, in issuing the notices on 03.01.2009 vide proceedings No.282/Advt/GHMC/2008-2009 in serial No.32 under Section 421 R/w section 622 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 treating the name Board/board frames fixed by the Petitioner on the parapet wall of its business place and consequently demanding the fee for the same is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and in violation of the principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIHARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER:- As the subject matter of these writ petitions is one and the same, they are taken up together for disposal by this common order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and the learned counsel appearing for unofficial respondents. These writ petitions are filed questioning the action of the respondent-Corporation in demanding advertisement fee from the petitioners on the ground that the names board fixed by them on parapet walls of the business places are covered by Sections 420 and 421 read with Section 622 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. Today, when these matters are taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the issue involved in these writ petitions is not res integra and a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.4172 of 2003 and batch dated 06.03.2007 has already considered the issue and disposed of the writ petitions giving liberty to the petitioners therein to make representations to the respondents within a period of two weeks and the respondents were directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass speaking orders on all the contentions raised by the petitioners. Following the same, these writ petitions are also disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to make representations to the respondents within a period of two weeks. On such representations being made, the respondents shall consider them and pass speaking orders on all the contentions raised by the petitioners. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 8th April, 2009 bcj