IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10989 of 2005 Between: M. Bharath Bhushan, S/o. Saibaba, R/o. Narketpally (V& M) Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Narketpally, Nalgonda District. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Narketpally, Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioner dt. 4-3-2004 for extension of licence period of the petitioner's stall (fancy shop) at APSRTC Bus Station Narkatpally, Nalgonda District as per circular No. 83/2003 OPC(C) dt. 29-10- 2003 as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner for extension of licence period. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD (S.C.FOR APSRTC) The Court at the admission stage made the following: ORDER: The petitioner, who is stated to be an occupant of a stall in the bus station of A.P.S.R.T.C., at Narketpally, Nalgonda District, sought for a direction to the respondents to consider his claim for extension of lease period as per Circular No.83/2003 OPC(C), dated 29.10.2003. According to the petitioner, he was granted licence for establishing a fancy shop at the bus station of Narketpally belonging to the respondent-Corporation. As there were certain disputes as to the lease period, the petitioner filed a suit being O.S.No.237 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda and the same is still pending. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-Corporation issued a circular for extending the lease period for a further period of three years subject to certain conditions. Therefore, he sought for a direction to the respondents to consider his case in terms of the said circular. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents in terms of Circular No.83/2003 OPC(C), dated 29.10.2003. If such a representation is made, the respondents are directed to consider the same on merits. However, it is made clear that the direction given by this Court shall not be construed as any stay or any direction against the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in the stall of the respondent-Corporation. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ 07.06.2005 VGB To 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Narketpally, Nalgonda District. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Narketpally, Nalgonda District. 3 2CD copies.