M/S. Gmr Ads v. The State Of Telangana And 5 Others
[3230 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRTDAY. rHE T*ENTY *^/r, DAY oF APR.L IWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO - :PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI IA No. I OF2022 IN WP NO: 23142 OF 2022 Between:
Mis. GMR Ads, No.l-8-450lllA-21, l" Floor, tndian Airlines Colony, Begumpet, Secunderabad,Rep. by its Managing Partner, G. Mastan Reddy,S/o. Raghunath Reddy, Aged about 53 years
...Petitioner
(Petitioner in WP.No.23l42 OF 2022 on the file of High Court) ANDl. The State olTelangana, Rep. by-its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.
2. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner.
3. The ChiefEngineer (Projects), Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, CC Complex, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.
4. The Superintending Enginee1 Q-CZ) Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, CC Complex, Tank Bund, Hyderabad
5. The Executive Engineer, T and T Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Old NTPC Building, Harihara Kala Bhavan, Hyderabad ,-
6. The Additional Commissioner (Advertisement), , Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Buda Ghavan, Hyderabad
...Respondents
(Respondents in-do) - Counsel for the Petitioner :Mr.P.Kasi Nageswara Rao, appearing on behalf of M/S.PLLIX LAW FIRM / Counsel for the Respondent No.l : GP for Municipal Administration (TG) - Counsel for the Respondent Nos,2 to 6 : Mr.Pasham Krishna Reddy, SC -- Petition under Section l5l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 6 not to interfere in the business of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above WP No.23 142 of 2022, on the file of the High Cotrt ,. The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondents herein to show cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following order.(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt ofnotice in the case).
ORDER
The writ petition is filed questioning the letter dated 21-04-2022, whereby the respondent-Corporation has addressed a letter to the Station House Officer, KPHB Traffic Police Station, Hyderabad, to remove the advertisement structure erected on the top of Foot Over Bridge at Sujana Forum Mall, KPHB on 21.04.2022 at 11.00 PM in order to further avoid unauthorized usage and also in view of public safety.
Learned Counsel Mr. P. Kasi Nageswara Rao, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that earlier when similar notices were issued, this Court, by order dated 06.10.2020 in W.P.No.17394 ol 2020, has granted interim order directing the respondents therein not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. He submits that now the administrative control from the project wing has been changed to advertisement wing and in view of the same, again the respondents have started issuing similar notices. He further submits that on 21.04,2022, the respondents called for review meeting and the petitioner's company is at Sl.No.2, and on the same day, the impugned orders were passed, Learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Clause-9 of the proceedings of the Superintending Engineer, Hyderabad, dated 30.03.
2022, and submits that the respondents can consider the case of petitioner for increasing the authorization period. He submits that without giving any opportunity to petitioner, the impugned order has been.passed. He further submits that the petitioner will make appropriate application to the respondents and on receipt of the same, respondents may be directed to pass appropriate orders and till such time, a direction may be given to the respondents not to take any coercive steps.
Learned Standing Counsel Mr. Pasham Krishna Reddy submits that the petitioner has not come up with any such application to the respondents and there is absolutely no illegality in the said letter addressed to the Station House Officer dated 21.04.2022.
ln the facts and circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents within a period of one week from today and on receipt of the same, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within
one week thereafter. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. ln case if the petitioner fails to give a representation/application within the stipulated time, respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
SD/.I.NAGALAKSMI ASSIST N EGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII iC To SECl'I OFFICER L The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, State olTelangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.
2. The Comnrissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.
3. The ChiefEngineer (Projects), Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, CC Complex, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. ,
4. The Superintending Engineer, (P-CZ) Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, CC Complex, Tank Bund, Hyderabad -
5. The Executive Engineer, T and T Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Old NTPC Building, Harihara Kala Bhavan, Hyderabad -
6. The Additional Commissioner (Advertisement), , Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Buda Ghavan, Hyderabad (RR-l to 6 by RPAD) /
7. One CC ro M/S. PILLIX LAW FIRM Advocate [OPUC] -
8. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration (TG), High Court Of Judicature at Hyderabad. [OUTI
9. One spare copy '
HIGH COURT LKJ DATED:29.04.2022 NOTE: POST ON 08.07.2022 I.A.NO.l 0F 2022 IN WP.NO.23142 0F 2022 INTERIM DIRECTION c