IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12836 of 2009 Between: Hotel Suprabhat H.No.2-3-40 OPP.Uppal Busstand,Uppal Hyderabad rep.by its proprietor M.Krishna Murthy S/o.M.S Manja OCC.Business, age (45) Years 4-7-95 Nagendra Nagar Colony,Habsiguda,Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep.by its Chief Commissioner Tank Bund,Hyderabad 2 The Addl.Commissioner Advertisement Section GHMC Tank Bund,Hyderabad 3 USM Business Systems Pvt Ltd 1-8-319/2 Patigadda Road,Behind Ford Showroom Begumpet,Secunderabad ...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 Boards fixed on the parapet wall of the business premises at H.No.2-3-40 OPP.Uppal Bustand,Uppal Hyderabad as Advertisement and issuing demand notices demanding to pay advertisement fee as illegal arbitrary and against the Section 421 of HMC Act and without jurisdiction and to pass 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 HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.12836 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the 2nd respondent- Additional Commissioner, Greator Hyderabad Municipal Corporation dated 21.05.2009 demanding advertising fee for erection of advertisement boards as arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2-Corporation that in 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 Corporations 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 petitioner herein is also similarly situated, following the above said orders, the impugned demand dated 21.05.2009 is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of 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. _______________ Justice G. Rohini Date. 30.06.2009 mrb