IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14120 of 2009 Between: 1 Dharamchand Jain S/o.Dali Chand 7-2-270-775, G/2 Panna complex Pot Market, Secunderabad-3 2 Pradee Kumar s/o.Dagdulal 7-2-775, Pot Market, Monda Market Secunderabad-3 3 Parasmal Ranka S/o.Bherulal Ranka 7-2-763, Pot Market, Monda Market Secunderabad-3 4 S.Rajender Kumar Jain S/o.M.Shermal Jain 7-2-762, Pot Market, Secunderabad-3 ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep.by its Special Officer & Commissioner, Tank Bund Road Hyderabad 2 The Additional Commissioner (Advertisement) Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund road Hyderabad 3 U.S.M.Business Systems Private Limited, 1-8-319/2 Patigadda Road, Behind Ford Show Room, secunderabad ....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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the notice dated 9/10-3-2009 vide proceedings No.245/AD1/Advt/GHMC/2008-09 in Serial Nos.5834,5850,5848,,5847,U/s.421 R/w. Sec.622 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 treating the name Board./board frames fixed by petitioners 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 in the interest of justice and equity and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.SAMINENI KISHORE Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 14120 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in treating the name board fixed on the parapet wall of the business premises of the petitioners as advertisement and thereby issuing notice dated 9/10.3.2009 to the petitioners demanding to pay advertisement fee, as illegal, arbitrary and against Section 421 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation that in an identical circumstances, W.P.No.5825 of 2006 and batch was disposed of by order dated 28.09.2006 holding as under: “…..to attract the provisions of Section 421 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the Corporation must satisfy itself first that the provisions are attracted and hence the fee can be levied. This exercise has to be made in individual cases…” It is also brought to my notice that following the said order, W.P.No.6715 of 2009 and etc., were disposed of with a direction to the Corporation to consider the cases of the petitioners therein individually and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Since the petitioners herein are also similarly situated, following the above said orders, the impugned demand notice dated 9/10.3.2009 is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission granting liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the respondents within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. If any such representation is made, the Corporation shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J Dt. 15th July 2009 RAR THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14120 of 2009 DATED : 15.07.2009