IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 2121 of 2009 Between: M/s. Hotel High Land, rep. by its Proprietor K.C. Sarath Chandra, S/o. Chinam Reddy, R/o. Palamaneru, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.S.R.T.C., rep. by its Regional Manager, Chittoor Region, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 A.P.S.R.T.C., rep. by its Divisional Manager, Chittoor District. .....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 a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent viz., a) in excluding the petitioner Hotel from B Category in the tender notification dated 31.1.2009, b) not supplying the tender document, and c) preventing it from submission of the same along with other Hotels, as illegal, improper arbitrary and contrary to law, and for a consequential direction declaring that the petitioner's Hotel is entitled to submit the tender application in pursuance of the tender notification dated 31.1.2009 and also directing the 1st respondent to refund the security deposit of Rs.1,00,020/- with interest. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.RAMAMOHAN-MAHADEVA Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The case of the petitioner-M/s. Hotel High Lands, which is situated at MBT Road, Palamaneru, is that it is having all facilities to cater to the needs of customers including the floating passengers of APSRTC and other transport vehicles. While so, the 1st respondent-Corporation called tenders in the year 2000 for fixation of royalty to be paid to APSRTC for allowing the buses to stop for tea, tiffins and meals at private hotels/Dhabhas on the route Tirupathi to Bangalore. The petitioner submitted tender on 28.1.2005, and the 1st respondent, vide its letter dated 30.5.2005, directed the petitioner to pay royalty fee of Rs.1,00,020/- towards security deposit for the licence period of three years. The petitioner further states that even after completion of the licence period the 1st respondent has not refunded the royalty fee. Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued Tender Notification dated 31.1.2009 calling applications from Category A and Category B hotels for fixation of royalty fee for a period of three years, but its grievance is that in the Notification, the 1st respondent specifically excluded the petitioner-Hotel from submitting its tender which falls under B category and not supplying the tender document to the petitioner for extraneous reasons. When the matter came up, the learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation appearing for the respondents, on instructions, has submitted that the following hotels which were allotted with licence in the previous tender fell in dues to APSRTC. The details of hotels and the dues are furnished hereunder: Name of the Hotel Amount Due (in Rs.) Hotel Vishnupriya 8,16,880/- Hotel High Lands 3,26,348/- Hotel Arun 11,63,644/- Hotel Lakshmibhavan 2,08,720/- However, it was mentioned in the tender notification that the hotels which are in dues to APSRTC are eligible to get licence only after clearance of dues. This means, the owners of the hotels can participate in tenders, but they will be eligible to get the licence only after they clear the dues, even if they are the highest tenderers. According to the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner is in dues to the APSRTC in an amount of Rs.3,26,348/-, which it has not cleared. If the petitioner clears the dues they will permit it in participating in the tender, for which the learned counsel for the petitioner agreed and submitted that the petitioner will clear the dues before filing the tender document. He further submitted that the petitioner has already paid an amount of Rs.1,00,020/- towards security deposit, and undertakes to deposit the balance amount also before filing the tender document. In view of the above stand taken by the petitioner’s counsel, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: Since the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,020/-, the respondents shall permit him to pay the balance amount, and on the petitioner paying the balance amount, they shall permit the petitioner to participate in the tender process. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 12th February, 2009 bcj