Y. Srinivasa Rao, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.40267 of 2015 Date: 11.12.2015 Between:

Y.Srinivasa Rao .. Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Prl.Secretary Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept., Hyderabad and 2 others .. Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.T.S.Venkataramana Counsel for respondent No.1: GP for Municipal Administration (AP) The Court made the following:

O r d e r :

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in not renewing the petitioner's lease for a further period of three years from 01.12.2015 to 30.11.2019 in respect of Bhavanipuram Community Hall, Vijayawada, as illegal and arbitrary.

I have heard Mr.T.S.Venkataramana, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.T.Balaswamy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2Greater Vijayawada Municipal Corporation. The petitioner has pleaded that in the auction held by respondent No.2 in respect of the leasehold rights of the aforesaid Community Hall, he has emerged as the highest bidder and was granted lease for a period of one year and that on the eve of expiry of the lease period on 30-11-2015, he has made representations on 09-11-2015 and 27-112015 to respondent No.2 seeking renewal of lease for a further period of three years. The grievance of the petitioner is that without considering his

representations, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are seeking to auction the leasehold rights of the Community Hall in question.

Inasmuch as the petitioner's representations for renewal of lease are pending with respondent Nos.2 and 3, I am not inclined to render any finding on his entitlement or otherwise for renewal at this stage. Therefore, without expressing any opinion thereon, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consider the petitioner's representations in accordance with Rule 12 (e) of the Regulation of Receipts and Expenditure Rules, 1968, notified under G.O.Ms.No.389 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (K1) Department, dated 24-092004, and communicate the decision to him within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. It is needless to observe that till such decision is taken, respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall not initiate steps for fresh auction.

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition,

WPMP.Nos.51987 and 51989 of 2015, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, are disposed of as infructuous.

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 11th December, 2015 lur