Shaik Afsar v. consequently direct the

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 Manuar render Notification vide case No.ct r122(B)t2024_ RM:NZB dated. 03.02.2025 issued by the 2'respondent to extent of petitioner,s case is concerned, by directing the respondents to extend the license to the petitioner for remairing period of five (5) years from 01 .01 .2o2s onwards in respect of DOT Stall No.9 of lndira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under Dor (Deposit, operate and rransfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counset for the petitioner : SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.ANURAG, (SC FOR TSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER l ORD E HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITIONNo. 470F2025 Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R'Anurag' learnedStandingcounselforTSRTC,appearingonbehalf of the resPondents. The oetitio ner a DDroa ched the Court s ekino Dra er 2 a un de r: *...to tssue one in a writ, order or direction more the nature of Writ of Mandamus pa rticu larlY declaring the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1lt22(B)/2O24-RM:NZB dated 03'02'2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No'9 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.1773/2025 dated:24.07'2025, 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 &&t' I 2 SN,J \\p 4041_2025 in respect of subject stall, and to pass sLrch other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may ,leems "it and prope'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 cloing business at road margin of RTC Bus Stand. In the year, 2007, to remove the road margin vendors and for the expansion cf road, the Government promisecl 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 \ /as 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. It. is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is further r:ntitled for getting remaining five (5) years lease i.e., uptc, Decenrber,2029 as per resolution No.133/2007, dated 24.tO.ZOO7, horvever, the said lease is; not being extended. Though this Court vide its order dated 24.CtL2025 in W.P.No.1773 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 J SN,J vtp-4}41 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-corpo ratio n issued Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C11122(8)/2024-RM:NZB dated 03'02'2025 calling up fresh tender in respect of the DOT Stall No'9 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District' Aggrieved by the saidactionoftherespondent-corporation,WhichiSinclear violatlon of the orders of thls Court' dated 24'Ol'2025 passed in W.P.No.1773 of 2025, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC appearing on behalf of the respondents placed on record the proceedings dated 07 'Ot'2025 vide No'LC/785(70)12024' RM:NZB of the Regional Manager' Nizamabad i'e" respondent No.2 herein and contends that the order of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in W'P'No'1773 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 law had been reconsidered by the respondent corporation duly considering the specific plea of the petitioner that the petitioner 4 SN,J \,\ p 4047 2025 had contributed certain amounts for construction of shops and appropriater reasoned orders had been passed and to ensure transparency and fairness, it is just and necessary that auction needs to b,3 conducted and the request of thr: petitioner to run petitioner's business for a further period of five years, cannot be accepted. t Takin !nt n rc alarrf iarrr. a) The submissions made by the learned counsel ippearing 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.OL.2025 vide No.LCl785(70)/2O24-RM:NZB issued in compliance to the orders of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in W.P.No.L773 ol 2025, 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-Regional Manager, TGSRTC, Nizamabad. In view of the fact as borne on record that the proceedings of the respondent ___-,-\-._, - 5 SN,J w_4O41 202s 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 (1) 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' As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed' SD/.K. AS ERAMA MURTHY T NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// S TION OFFICER To, 1 The Managing Director, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation' Bus Bhavan, RTC-X-Road, HYderabad.

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 QUADRI, Advocate lOPUCl 5. One CC to SRI R.ANURAG, (SC FOR TSRTC) [OPUCI 6. Two CD Copies. BSt</BSK CC TODAY {E SI4 rc, 1 ( ,7j rsilrflM P 7.-K |< O HIGH COURT DATE D: 1 310212025 ORDER WP.No.4047 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS g 4/t /l