IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11593 of 2010 Between: U. Ravi ..... Petitioner AND The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri C. Damodar Reddy Counsel for the respondents: Sri Krishna Reddy for Sri Sridhar Reddy The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11593 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings dated 05.05.2010 of respondent No.2, whereby he has declined the petitioner’s request for changing his line of business from Bakery and Tiffin centre to sale of Fancy items and Flowers. For the purpose of disposal of this Writ Petition, it is not necessary to refer to the facts in detail. Clause 5 of the Deed of Licence entered between the petitioner and respondent No.2 reads as under: “For change of business subsequently during the period of the license, the approval of the tender committee constituted shall be obtained. Failure to do so will attract penal provisions. The tender committee has the discretion to permit change of business. The tender committee has the right to demand enhanced license fee commensurate with the business proposed to be changed. However, under no circumstances, the license fee for the changed business shall be less than the license fee offered for the earlier business.” It is the case of the petitioner that as his Bakery and Tiffin center for which he was allotted stall No.32 is found un-remunerative, he has made application to the respondents for permitting him to change line of business in terms of the above-reproduced clause. However, by the impugned order, the Regional Manager of respondent No.2 has rejected the said application. In my opinion, the Regional Manager has no power or jurisdiction to reject the request of the petitioner for permitting him to change line of business in view of the above-reproduced clause of the license. It is only the tender committee, which has the power and discretion to permit change of business as per the abovementioned clause. On this short ground alone, the impugned order is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to place the petitioner’s representation for change of business before the tender committee, within three weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Within three weeks thereafter, the tender committee shall decide on the petitioner’s application with reference to the material that may be placed by him before it. It is made clear that till the tender committee takes a decision on the petitioner’s application, he shall be entitled to carry on business strictly in accordance with the terms of the deed of license. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.Nos.14691 of 2010 and 159 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 21.02.2011 ES Note:- Issue CC in five (5) days. ES