HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.764 OF 2008 Date: 12th July 2010 Between: M/s.Vijaya Matching Centre, Vijayawada, rep. by its Proprietor. … Petitioner And The Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.764 OF 2008 ORDER: Though interlocutory matters are listed, at the request of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and is being disposed of. In the writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, in taking steps for his eviction from shop No.22 in V.H.R. Complex, Governorpet, Vijayawada, as illegal and arbitrary, with consequential directions to the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the said shop. The petitioner is carrying on the business in cloth in shop No.22 of V.H.R. Complex, Governorpet, Vijayawada, constructed by the Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada. It is the case of the petitioner that originally, shop No.22 was being run as a Firm by an individual by name Sri Harischandra Prasad, but the petitioner has joined as a partner in 1994, and subsequently, the said Harischandra Prasad retired from the partnership, as such, the same is remained as a Proprietary concern. It is the case of the petitioner that the shop was allotted to him like the other tenants, and though there is no default on his part in paying rents, respondents are taking steps for his eviction from the aforesaid shop. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though similar such tenants were in occupation of other shops, no action is being taken by the respondent-Corporation for their eviction, but in a discriminatory manner, respondents are taking steps for his eviction. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the respondent- Municipal Corporation. While denying the various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated in the counter that shop No.22 of V.H.R. Complex, owned by the Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, was allotted to an individual by name Sri Harischandra Prasad, but not to any Firm or a Company. It is stated that the respondent-Corporation has never identified the petitioner as a partner of any Firm and he is only a sub-lessee, who was inducted by the original lessee and that he is continued in the premises illegally. It is also stated that earlier, when the sub- tenants of other shops, including the petitioner herein, were sought to be evicted by the Corporation, they have approached this Court, by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.11912 of 2002, but the said writ petition was dismissed. It is stated that the Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada has resolved to continue the sub-lessees by collecting 18 months rent towards mutation fee and further 6 months rent as security deposit, as per Resolution No.387, dated 24.01.2001. Though the petitioner has offered to pay such amount and issued cheques, but the same were bounced, as such, he cannot claim to be a rightful lessee in respect of shop No.22. It is submitted that the petitioner is due an amount of Rs.2,69,640/-, and a notice was also issued to him on 28th of January 2008, demanding him to pay the said amount, but there was no response from him. In this writ petition, the petitioner has not produced any lease deed in his favour, and no material is placed on record to show that he is a lessee of the shop in question. Although it is the case of the petitioner that the earlier occupant of shop No.22 was a Firm, but no such material is also placed on record. In view of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-Corporation that the lease was allotted on individual’s name, the plea of the petitioner that he has become the proprietor in view of the retirement of original lessee Sri Harischandra Prasad from partnership, cannot be accepted. Moreover, earlier also, when the petitioner approached this Court along with other sub-lessees by filing W.P.No.11912 of 2002, the same was dismissed by this Court. In that view of the matter, it is not open for the petitioner to continue in the premises in question, in the absence of any valid lease with the respondent-Corporation. Though an opportunity is given to the petitioner by virtue of benefits in terms of Resolution No.387, dated 24.01.2001, as it is stated that the amounts in terms of said resolution were also not paid by the petitioner, the petitioner has no right to continue as a lessee in shop No.22. When the matter has come up for hearing on last occasion, it was adjourned to enable the learned counsel for petitioner to ascertain the views of the petitioner with regard to payment of amount as per Resolution No.387, dated 24.01.2001. Today, the learned counsel states that he has no instructions from his client with regard to payment of such amount. For the aforesaid reasons, and in view of the fact that no material is placed before this Court that the petitioner is a lessee of the shop in question, the steps, which are being taken by the respondent-Corporation for eviction of the petitioner, cannot be said to be illegal. As much as the respondents have passed a resolution to regularise the sub-lessees by collecting 18 months rent as mutation fee and further 6 months rent as security deposit, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to deposit the entire amount due to be paid to the respondent-Corporation within a period of six months from today, and if such amounts are paid, petitioner may be permitted to continue in the shop, by paying the monthly rent. If any amount is already paid by the petitioner, the same shall be given credit, while collecting the amounts as per Resolution No.387, dated 24.01.2001. If the petitioner fails to pay the amounts referred above within the time stipulated, it is open for the respondent- Corporation to take steps for his eviction. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 12th July 2010 Note: Furnish C.C. in three days. (b/o) ajr