IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21869 of 2008 Between: New Milap Sandarshini Hotel, Pr.No. 1-2-225, S.D. Road, Secunderabad, rep. by its proprietor, S.M. Wazeer Ali s/o: Manzoor Ali, aged about 68 years, R/o: Flat No. 111, Dandu Clasic Towers, Padmaraonagar, Secunderaabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Greater Hyderabad municipal Corporation, rep. by its Chief Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2. The Addl. Commissioner, Advertisement Ssection GHMC, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 3. Nest Enterprises Private Limited (Authorised Advertisement fee Collection Agent of MCH), MIG, 9-B, Indian Airlines Colony, Street No.3, Opp: Airport, Begumpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in treating the name Board ﬁxed on the parapet wall of the business premise of petitioner as advertisement and issuing demand notice in proceedings No. 43401/869/Advt/MCH/2007-08, dated 24-9-2008 demanding to pay advertisement fee as illegal, arbitrary and against the Section 421 of HMC Act and without jurisdiction and to pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SREENIVASA RAO VELIVELA Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21869 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by New Milap Sandarshini Hotel represented by its proprietor S.M. Wazeer Ali assailing the notice under Section 421 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 issued by the Addl. Commissioner, Advertisement Section –2nd respondent. 2. The petitioner is carrying on hotel business in the premises by erecting name of the Hotel on the parapet wall of the premise. The petitioner obtained necessary license to run the hotel business. While so, the respondent 1 and 2 through 3rd respondent issued a demand notice dated 24-9-2008 in Proceedings No. 43401/869/Advt/MCH/2007-08 alleging that the name board erected by the petitioner comes within the purview of advertisement and directed the petitioner to pay advertisement fee as required under Section 421 r/w 622 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and Rules made therein. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned standing counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation received notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. The issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in National Insurance Company Limited, Hyderabad Vs. Additional Commissioner (Finance), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad[1] wherein the notice issued under Section 421 r/w 622 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act has been treated as show cause notice directing the petitioner therein to file explanation. 6. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of treating the notice impugned in the writ petition as show cause notice and directing the petitioner to submit objections/explanation within four weeks from today and thereupon the respondents shall pass appropriate orders. Till the disposal of the objections/explanation oﬀered by the petitioner, the order impugned in the writ petition shall remain in suspension. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 30th September, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21869 OF 2008 30th September, 2008. [1] 2007(1) ALD 312