IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7671 of 2005 Between: G.R.Sunitha, w/o G.R.Mohan, r/o 5-948, S.H.Pet, Nellore. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The General Manager, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. 2 The Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. 3 The Divisional Railway Manager, Vijayawada Division, Vijayawada. 4 The Divisional Railway Manager (Commercial), Vijayawada Division, Vijayawada. .....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 order, direction or writ one in the nature of writ of mandamus setting aside the (notification) Corrigendum dtd.04-04- 05 issued by the 4th respondent (published in Deccan Chronicle Daily dated 04-04-05) declaring the same as arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and illegal, void and unconstitutional and direct the respondents not to issue fresh Notification for allotment of STD Booths at the stations over BZA Division and to direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in accordance with the terms and conditions of letters of award issued to the petitioners, in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MRCHETLURU SREENIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.GOURI SHANKAR SANGHI The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed challenging the notification, issued by the fourth respondent, published in the newspaper on 04-04-2005, canceling the earlier notification, dated 31-08-2003, issued vide Tender Notice No.B/C.14/STD Phones-ISD-PCO/Local Call/FAX/ Internet Booths/BZA/01, calling for tenders for allotment of STD Booths. The respondents have issued notification on 31-08- 2003 inviting bids to operate STD/ISD/PCO/Fax/Internet booths in 9 “A” class stations and 9 “B” class stations. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner has submitted his tender for operation of STD/ISD/FAX/Internet Booth at Nellore Railway Station at Platform Nos.2 & 3 and the respondents by proceedings, dated 06-01-2005, issued in proceedings No.B/C.14/STD Booths/NLR/2004, accepted the bid of the petitioner for a period of five years from the date of operation of the STD Booth, subject to certain conditions. It is a case of the petitioner that in view of the acceptance of the offer of the petitioner, she has already complied with the conditions and when she was about to start the STD/ISD/FAX/Internet Booth, respondents have issued the impugned notification canceling the earlier notification, dated 31-08-2003. Precisely, it is the case of the petitioner that as the tender of the petitioner has already been accepted, there is no authority or jurisdiction for the respondents to cancel the notification, after accepting the offer of the petitioner. At the stage of admission, this Court, by order, dated 07-04-2005, granted interim suspension and on the vacate stay petition filed by the respondents, the suspension order was confined only to STD and PCO Booth allotted to the petitioner. It is submitted by Sri B.H.R.Chowdary, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, that in view of the change of policy for setting up STD/ISD booths, the impugned notification is issued. In this case it is to be seen that the offer of the petitioner was accepted only for a period of five years from the date of operation of STD booth and the same is communicated through proceedings, dated 06-01-2005. Though it is stated that a new policy is notified, but the same is to be given prospective operation to set up the booth for which offers are not accepted by the date of the revised policy. In any event, as much as the petitioner has started and operating his booth in view of the interim order passed by this Court, and very acceptance of the bid is for a period of five years, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition permitting the petitioner to continue the remaining period so as to complete five years from the date of starting of operation of the STD booth by her. It is also made clear that after expiry of the said period of five years, as referred above, it is open to the respondents to re-notify for allotment of STD/ISD /PCO/Fax/Internet booths as per the revised policy. Subject to above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. 16th July, 2009 skmr