THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.4803 OF 2005 15th December 2009 Between: Gamidi Srinivas Rao and one other. …PETITIONERS AND The State Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and one other. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.4803 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioners are lessees of the shops in ‘Ram Gopal Satram shopping complex’ at Vijayawada, owned by the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation. It is their grievance that the existing rent for their shops is Rs.187/- and Rs.236/- per month, but the same has been enhanced to Rs.629/- per month. It is contended that the increase in rent should not be more than 33 1/3% of the existing rent, and further, such enhancement has to be made under notice and intimation to the petitioners. In the counter affidavit filed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, while denying the allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that there are ten shops existing in Ram Gopal Satram Complex, Vijayawada, which were leased out to various lessees and from time to time, the leases were being extended. It is further stated that the Standing Committee for extension of lease has decided to enhance the rents basing on the site value and construction cost, and as such, the enhancement of rent was fixed at Rs.5.42 ps. per square feet. Accordingly, proceedings were issued to all the lessees and that all other lessees are paying the rents at the enhanced rate, except the petitioners. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for petitioners did not place any material before this Court in support of his contention that the enhancement of rent should not be more than 33 1/3% of the existing rent. Learned counsel submits that in one other building by name ‘I.V. Plaza’, considering their representation, the enhancement of rent was confined only to 33 1/3%. Rents are to be increased by the Municipal Corporation and the Standing Committee of the Corporation, having regard to the quality of construction, location of the building and probable business in the area. In that view of the matter, merely because the enhancement was confined to 33 1/3% in one shopping complex, the same shall not be a ground to question the increase in the rent of the shops, which are located at a different complex, by name ‘Ram Gopal Satram Complex’. Further, it is also to be noted that out of ten lessees, the other eight lessees are paying the increased rent, except the petitioners herein. As no ground is made out by the petitioners in support of their contention that the increase in rent shall be confined to 33 1/3%, I do not find any reason to interfere with the enhancement made by the 2nd respondent-Municipal Corporation. For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) 15th December 2009 RRB