IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 23998 of 2001 BETWEEN: National Insurance Co., Ltd., Hyderabad Divisional Office-IV Rep. by B. Praveen Kumar, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER AND Additional Commissioner (Finance) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT 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 a writ, order or direction more in the nature of a writ of mandamus by declaring the notice in letter Rc.No.2292/Advt/MCH/2001, dt:20.8.2001 issued by the respondent herein as being illegal and void and further direction to the respondent to desist from enforcing and demand arising out of the said notice thereon and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.VENKATARATNAM Counsel for the Respondent: MR. R. RAMACHANDRA REDDY GP FOR MUN. AMDN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following: ORDER: None appears for the petitioner. 2. Learned standing counsel for the respondent submits that in similar cases were disposed by this Court in WP.No.4172 of 2003 and batch dated 06.03.2007 giving liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks while directing the respondents to consider the representations and pass speaking orders. The questions raised in this writ petition are similar to those raised in the above batch of writ petitions relating to the demand notices issued under Section 421 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) for payment of advertisement fee. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and following the aforesaid judgment, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondent within a period of two weeks. The respondent may consider the same and pass appropriate orders on the contentions raised by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 10, 2008 DSK