IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.25062 of 2009 Between: Mirza Azam Ali ..... PETITIONER AND The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Jubilee Bus stop, Secunderabad and two others ..... RESPONDENTS ORDER: Heard the learned counsel. 2. This court ordered notice before admission on 18-11-2009 and directed the parties to maintain status-quo. 3. Counter-affidavit had been filed by the respondents. Sri Ch. Janardhan Reddy, the learned counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the material papers placed before this court and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice cannot be sustained. 4. However, Sri K. Madhava Reddy, the learned counsel representing the respondents would maintain that inasmuch as this is a matter concerned with the contractual obligation the writ petition cannot be maintained. The learned counsel also relied on DEVI CONSTRUCTIONS V. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER AND ANOTHER[1]. The counsel also would submit that even otherwise this is only a notice and the petitioner is at liberty to submit objections, if any, which may be considered by the respondents. 5. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the notice No.01/122(1)/2008-KG dated 10-11-2009 of the second respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the deed of licence dated 30-11-2007 and violative of Article 19 1(g) of Constitution of India in the interest of justice and pass such other suitable orders. 6. Several facts had been narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. 7. It is stated that the respondent invited the tenders from interested persons to establish Fast Food Center at ECIL Bus Station i.e., 3rd respondent’s depot vide Notification No.MK4/122(5)/2007-HCR dated 17-11-2007. Further it is stated that after the execution of the deed of licence dated 30-11-2007 the respondents allotted the open site of an extent of 10’ x 10’ towards main road side and directed the petitioner to construct the shop by giving permission on 01-03-2008. Accordingly, the petitioner had constructed the shop in the month of March, 2008 and April, 2008 and started the fast food center on 08-08-2008. He is also paying lience fee every month as per the deed of licence dated 30-11-2007. It is also stated that the respondents closed the bus station from 02-02-2009 onwards and no buses are coming inside the bus. While so, on 10-11-2009 the respondents issued the impugned notice for termination of the contract of the Fast Food Centre at third respondent’s depot stating that the respondents are undertaking the construction of the Bus Terminal Complex for providing amenities to the passengers under JNNURM Scheme. 8. It is not in serious controversy that the present writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of Mandamus to declare the notice dated 10-11-2009 issued by second respondent as illegal. Certain of the facts, which had been narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition had been denied in the counter-affidavit. 9. Specific stand had been taken that the writ petition has to be dismissed since the public interest would take precedence over the individual interest. 10. Certain submissions were made that the writ petitioner had spent certain amounts and raised certain constructions. These objections also may be raised by the writ petitioner before the second respondent. 11. Be that as it may, inasmuch as notice had been challenged in the present writ petition, this court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to submit objections to the notice No.01/122(1)/2008-KG dated 10-11-2009 issued by the second respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and let the second respondent consider such objections and pass appropriate orders in this regard, at the earliest point of time. Till such exercise is made, status quo obtaining as on to day to be maintained. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ P.S. NARAYANA, J January 21, 2010. Note: Furnish CC by 27-01-2010. B/o.Pn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.25062 of 2009 January 21, 2010 Note: Furnish CC by 27-01-2010. B/o.Pn [1] AIR 2002 ANDHRA PRADESH 200