IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.5647 of 2009 Between: R.S. Brothers, MIG - 225 and 226, Travelers Road, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Rep by its Manager, Sri T. N. V. Murali Krishna, S/o. Sri T. Sriramamurthy, Aged 40 years, R/o. 45, MIG - II, Muskar Mahal, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Special Officer & Commissioner, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Kukatpally Circle, The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 3 N. Navodaya India Enterprises Private Ltd, 1st Floor, Srinivasa Complex, Kukatpally, 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the notices dated 24-11-2008 vide Challon No. 046 under section 114 to 118 of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 treating the name Board/board frames fixed by the petitioner on the parapet wall of its business place and consequently demanding the fee for the same is illegal, arbitrary, capricious and in violation of the principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRIHARI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1and2: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for respondents 1 and 2, and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. The writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent- Corporation in demanding advertisement fee from the petitioner on the ground that the name board fixed by it on parapet wall of the business place is covered by Sections 420 and 421 read with Section 622 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the issue involved in this writ petition is not res integra and a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.4172 of 2003 and batch dated 06.03.2007 has already considered the issue and disposed of the writ petitions giving liberty to the petitioners therein to make representations to the respondents within a period of two weeks and the respondents were directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass speaking orders on all the contentions raised by the petitioners. Following the same, this writ petition is also disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks. The respondents shall consider the representation of the petitioner and pass speaking orders on all the contentions raised by the petitioner. N.V. RAMANA, J Date: 19.03.2009 va