IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 20096 of 2001 Between: 1 Sri Jagadamba Pearls Dealer Rep by its Partner Sri Ravinder Agrawal, S/o. Sri Chaturbhuj, 2-4-26, M.G. Road, Secunderabad- 500003. 2 Rocha Bazar Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Navin Jethwani,S/o.Rochaldas Jeth 2-2-159, Subhash Road, Secunderabad-500003. 3 Rocha Again Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Navin Jethwani,S/o.Rochaldas Jeth Paradise Circle, Secunderabad - 500003. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Tank Bund road, Hyderabad. 2 The Additional Commissioner (Finance), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tank Bund road, Hyderabad. ...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 a Writ or any other direction in the nature of Writ more particularly Writ of Mandamus to the respondent declaring demand notice Rc.No.2292/Advt/MCH/2001, Dt.20.8.2001, issued to the petitioner are illegal, arbitrary, high-handed, violative of Article 14,19 (1)(g) of the constitution of India and issuing any other Writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: SMT.C.JAYASREE SARATHY Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.G.JYOTHI KIRAN FOR R1 MR. R. RAMACHANDRA REDDY FOR R2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The matter relates to the renewal/regularization of the unauthorized advertisements and payment of advertisement fee and arrears up to years 2001-2002 and the subject matter of the period in which the arrears to be collected is already over. More so, no interim direction has been granted by this Court. The impugned notices issued in accordance with Section 622 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 cannot be held to be illegal and invalid. On a perusal of the records, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are not entitled for any relief in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 3, 2008 DSK