The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of lt/andamus declaring the impugned Manual render Notification vide case No.c1l122(8)12024-RM NZB dated. o3to2t2o2s issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of Dor stall No.7 of lndira RTC Bus stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under Dor (Deposit, operate and rransfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, without reconsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease, and contrary to directions issued by this Honourable court in wp No.1768 t2o2s dated. 24to1t2o2s, is highty illegat, arbitray, unjust, unconstitutional, and in violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioners case is concerned, consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the license period remaining period of five (5) years in respect of subject stall. I lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned IVanual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1h22(8)12O24- RM:NZB dated. 0310212025 issued by the 2nd respondent to extent of petitioners case is concerned, bv directing the respondents to extend the license to the petitioner for remaining period of five (5) years from 0110112025 onwards in respect of DOT Stall No.7 of lndira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.ANURAG, (SC FOR TSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS ]USTICE SUREPALLI NANDA R PE TI NN 3 69 F 2 ORDER: Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri' learned counse! appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R'Anurag' learnedStandingCounselforTSRTC,appearingonbehalf of the respondents. e ion ra ro he t c u se kin r er

2.7 as u nder: one in "...to ISSUC a writ, order or direction more the nature of Writ of Mandamus particularlY declaring the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1l122(8)/2024-RM:NZB dated 03'02'2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No'7 of Indira RTC Bus Stand' Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme' in the year, 2007, without reconsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease, and contrary to directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in WP No.176812025 dated:24' Ol'2025, is highlv illegal' arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, and in violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioner's case is concerned' and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the license period for remaining period of five (5) years 2 SN,J wp 3969 2025 in respect of subject stall, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is the lease holder of the shop of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada and he is doinq business at road margin of RTC Bus Stand. In the year, 2007, to remove the road margin vendors and for the expansion of road, the Government promised the petitioner to allot shopS in the newly constructed building under DOT Scheme for a period of twenty (20) years, for which the petitioner agreed. After completion of construction of shops, initially, the petitioner was granted the lease for a period of five (5) years on a fair monthly rent and the said lease was extended from time to time, and was valid till the end of December, 2024. \t is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is further entitled for getting remaining five (5) years lease i.e., upto, December, 2029 as per resolution No.133/2007, dated 24.LO.2007, however, the said lease is not being extended. Though this Court vide its order dated 24.07.2025 in W.P.No.1768 of 2025, directed the respondents to re-consider the case of the petitioner for extension of lease for further period of five years up to Ij 3 SN,J wp 3969_2025 December, 2029 within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of the said order and till such time' the respondents were directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject stall' the respondent-co rporatio n issued Manual Tender Notification vide case No.c1l122(B) I2OZ -RM:NZB dated 03-02'2025 calling up fresh tender in respect of the DOT Stall No'7 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District' Aggrieved by the saidactionoftherespondent-corporation,whichisinclear violation of the orders of this Court, dated 24'Ol'2025 passed in {. W.P.No.lT6Eof2025,thepetitionerfiledthepresentwrit petition.

4. Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC appearing on behalf of the respondents placed on record the proceedings dated 07.Ol'2025 vide No'LC/785(70)12024- RM:NZBoftheRegionalManager,Nizamabadi.e.,respondent No.2 herein and contends that the order of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in W'P'No'1768 of 2025 had been duly complied with and the request of the petitioner for extension of lease period of DOT stalls for another five years in accordance to lawhadbeenreconsideredbytherespondentcorporationduly considering the specific plea of the petitioner that the petitioner 4 SN.J w 3969 2025 had contributed certain amounts for construction of shops and appropriate reasoned orders had been passed and to ensure transparency and fairness, it is just and necessary that auction needs to be conducted and the request of the petitioner to run petitioner's business for a further period of five years, cannot be accepted. akin tn consid r a) The submissions made by the learned counse! iippearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC appearing on behalf of the respondent-corporation and, b) The proceedings of respondent No.2 dated 07.O1.2025 vide No.LCl785(7O)/2O24-RM:NZB issued in compliance to the orders of this Court dated 24.O1.2O25 passed in W.p.No.L76B of 2OZS, The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said proceedings dated 07.OL.2025 issued by the respondent No.2-Regionat Manager, TGSRTC, Nizamabad. In view of the fact as borne on record that the proceedings of the respondent I I t E I 5 SN,J wp,3969-2025 No.2 dated 07-OL'2O25 had been issued in pursuance to the petitioner approaching this Court by filing the present writ petition, a reasonable period of one (O1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order is granted to the petitioner to pursue the petitioner's remedies' The respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner for a period of one (O1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to enable the petitioner to pursue the remedies as are available to the petitioner'against the order of the 2nd respondent dated 07.OL.2O25. However, there shall be no order as to costs' Asa sequel, the miscellaneous petitions' if any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed' SD/.K.SREERAM A MURTHY ASSI T NTREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/' ECTION OFFICE R r,'," Ro ad r ra n spo rt co rpo ratio n' B u s I[: J:i:ft+BgI ["":,S: r-r13[%'# , 2. The Regional Manager' TGSRTC' Nizamabad' Nizamabad District' 3. The Depot Manager' TGSRTC' Bansada Depot' Kamareddy District' 4. One CC to SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED OUADRI' Advocate' IOPUCI 5. One CC to SRI R'ANURAG' (SC FOR TSRTC)' [OPUCI 6. Two CD Copies BSI(BSK \r To, -t HIGH COURT DATE D: 1 310212025 ORDER WP.No.3969 of 2025 CC TODAY 1HE SI4re o3 $ r_ i 19 ilAH 2m a- J.J .) '\_ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS tL \q 3 l-,--- t'