IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.13317 of 2002 Between: Sri P.Bhaskara Murthy and another. … Petitioners And Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, Reptd., by its Commissioner, Vijayawada-1. … Respondent Counsel for the petitioners: None. Counsel for the respondent: Smt. G.Jhansi. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent-Vijayawada Municipal Corporation (for short “the Corporation) in trying to remove the name boards mentioned in the prayer of the Writ Petition and demanding the advertisement tax in respect of the said boards, without assessment of levy and demand, as arbitrary and illegal. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Heard Smt.G.Jhansi, learned standing counsel for the Corporation, and perused the record. In their affidavit, the petitioners averred that they are the owners of several shops referred in paragraph 3; and that in connection with the running of their shops, they display the boards exhibiting the respective trades and avocations in which they are running the trade. The petitioners maintained that while there is no liability imposed under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”), which is extended to the Corporation, the Corporation is taking steps to collect the advertisement tax and remove the boards for the alleged nonpayment of such tax In the counter-affidavit filed by the Commissioner of the Corporation it is, inter alia, stated that as the petitioners are liable to pay advertisement tax, notices were issued to them proposing to take action for enforcement of the provisions of the Act for imposition and collection of advertisement tax. It is further stated that advertisement tax was being imposed on glow signs and sign boards, but not on the name boards; and that notices were issued to all the persons, including the petitioners, for payment of advertisement tax on or before 30-6-2002, failing which the boards will be removed and further action would be taken as per the provisions of the Act. At the hearing, Smt.G.Jhansi, learned standing counsel for the Corporation, submitted that a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 6-3-2007 passed in Writ Petition No.4172 of 2003 and batch held that the Corporation shall decide on the objections of the traders on their liability to pay advertisement tax on the boards displayed at their shops and that it is only after such a decision is taken and orders are passed further action shall be taken. In view of the said order of this Court and considering the stand of the Corporation that only notices have been issued for collection of tax, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Corporation to issue fresh notices to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such notices, the petitioners shall file their objections within a period of two weeks thereafter. Within a period of four weeks thereafter, the Corporation shall decide on the objections, if any, submitted by the petitioners, pass appropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioners before initiating any steps for collection of advertisement tax. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:10-2-2009 MNR