THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8499 of 2008 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ (i) declaring the action of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in entrusting collection of advertisement fee to the private agencies is in contravention of the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and beyond the scope of the powers of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation; (ii) declare that the notice issued on behalf of the Additional Commissioner (Advertisement), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad by the 2nd and 3rd respondents is illegal and without jurisdiction (iii) declare that the 2nd and 3rd respondents have no power or authority to issue notices in exercise of powers under Section 421 read with Section 622 of H.M.C.Act, 1955 (iv) consequently declare that the 2nd and 3rd respondents have no power or authority to demand or collect the advertisement fee for the signage displayed by the petitioner.” When the matter is taken up, it is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that subject matter of the present Writ Petition is covered to be allowed in view of common order, dated 31.12.2009 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.23354 of 2009 and batch. I have perused a copy of the above referred to common order passed in Writ Petition No.23354 of 2009 and batch, in which, this Court has considered the powers of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation to assign the contract of collecting advertisement fee, to the private agencies, and allowed such batch of cases. Following the above referred to common order in Writ Petition No.23354 of 2009 and batch, this Writ Petition is also allowed holding that a) the advertisement fee levied by the Corporation is in the form of a tax referable to Section 197 of the Act and it could not have been levied without specific authority and in accordance with the prescribed procedure; b) the notices impugned in the Writ Petitions do not accord with Sections 169, 633 and other relevant provisions of the Act, and they are accordingly set aside, and c) the Corporation is entitled to insist on the permissions being obtained for erection and display of advertisements, subject, however, to the exceptions covered by the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 421 of the Act; and to stipulate fee thereof, commensurate with the service or regulatory activity, and in its discretion to levy tax, under Section 197(f), duly following the prescribed procedure. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 29th NOVEMBER, 2011. kvni