IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 377 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28/02/2008 in WP NO : 4214 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Sri Vangal Markandeya Sastry (V. Venkatarama Sastry Petrol Bunk) rep by Prop. V. Markandeya Sastry S/o.Vangal Venkatarama Sastry R/o. KK Towers, Plot No.G1,Bandipet 3/19,Guntur- 2. ..... APPELLANT AND The Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant:MR.GANDURI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.VENKATARATNAM The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by the order dated 28-2-2008 in W.P.M.P.No.5506 of 2008 in W.P.No.4214 of 2008 this appeal has been filed. The appellant-original petitioner has been aggrieved by an order, whereby interim relief was not granted in favour of the appellant by the learned single Judge. Apart from the fact that grant of interim relief in the case would have amounted to allowing the petition, there are other factors against the appellant for which the interim relief was refused by the learned single Judge. Admittedly, the appellant-original petitioner is dealing in Petroleum Products and therefore, he has to take necessary licence under the provisions of Section 521 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) and he has to pay licence fee for obtaining the licence. According to the appellant, he is not supposed to take licence and therefore, he approached this Court by filing W.P.No.4214 of 2008. The learned single Judge has refused to grant interim relief and therefore, the appeal has been filed. For the reasons stated hereinabove and upon perusal of the provisions of Section 521 of the Act, we are of the view that prima facie, the petitioner is liable to pay the fee as determined. In the circumstances, we do not find any substance in this appeal and the appeal is therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. _______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ _______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th April, 2008 GRR To 1. 2.2 CD copies