THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.568 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioners were the lessees in respect of shops in old complex constructed and maintained by Guduru Municipality, the 1st respondent herein. In the place of the old one, a new complex was constructed in the year 1998. The petitioners had to vacate their premises in old complex. The Government issued G.O.Rt.No.404, dated 18-05-1998, directing that the lessees in the old complex shall be allotted shops in the new complex by fixing fair rent. Petitioners 1 to 13 got the benefit under the G.O and rest of the petitioners under individual orders. The rent was fixed and they continued as lessees. The term of the lease is 3 years. The rent was fixed at Rs.1,300/- per shop with the dimension 16 feet x 12 feet and Rs.650/- per shop with 8 feet x 12 feet. The petitioners became liable to be evicted on expiry of lease in the year 2005. They made representation on 05-02-2005 requesting that their leases be continued by enhancing the rent by one-third. The request was acceded to. The 1st respondent also extended similar benefit to the lessees in other shopping complex. While acceding to the request of the petitioners, the 1st respondent passed resolution directing that the enhancement of rent by one-third shall be for each spell of 3 years. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P.No.11134 of 2006. The writ petition was disposed on 22-09-2006 leaving it open to the petitioners to make a representation to the Council. On consideration of the representation made by the petitioners, the Council passed a resolution on 30-12-2006 reiterating its earlier stand. The same is challenged by the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The leases in the Municipalities and Municipal Corporations are to be sanctioned by conducting pubic auction. Renewal of lease by enhancing the rent by one-third is itself an exceptional step. In a given case, the enhancement can be more, if auction is conducted. The petitioners themselves wanted leases to be extended by increasing the rent by one-third. Even where the facility of extension of existing leases by enhancing the rent by one-third is in vogue, it is but natural that such enhancement must be calculated for each spell of 3 years. The petitioners want that the enhancement for 2 spells i.e., between 1998 to 2001 and 2001 to 2004 be ignored. Such a request cannot be acceded to, at all. In any way, it would put premium on the unauthorised and illegal occupation of the shops and the corresponding lapse on the part of the Municipality. There are no merits in this writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are arrears of rent that are payable on account of such retrospective enhancement. The petitioners are granted time of six months to clear the arrears in such a way that 50% of the arrears shall be cleared by the end of April, 2011 and the balance by the end of July, 2011. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 3rd February, 2011 VJL/KDL