High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 Mandamus declaring the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C1|122(B)12024-RM:NZB dated.03.02.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No.4 of lndira 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.'199412025 dated.24.01 .2025, is highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutio nal, and in violation of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioners case is concerned, and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the license period for remaining period of five (5) years in respect of subject stall. 'ri3 _7 *: 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 Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C|l122(8)12024-RM:NZB dated.03.02.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent to extent of petitioner s case is concerned, by directing the respondents to extend the license to the petitioner for remaining period of five (5) years from 01.01.2025 onwards in respect of DOT Stall No.4 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 JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.399 soF20 25 ORD ER: Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R'Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2 The Detitioner a oo roach ed the court s ekino oraver as under: "...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus 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 ln respect of DOT Stall No.4 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (Deposit, Operate and Transfer) scheme, in the year, 2007, without i-econsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease, and contrary to directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in WP No.r994l2O25 dated:24.01.2025, 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* 2 SN,J \\? 3995_2025 in respect of subject stall. and to pass such other order or ord€rrs 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 doing 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. It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is further entitled for getting remaining five (5) years Iease i.e., upto, December, 2029 as per resolution No.133/2007, dated 24.10.2007, however, the said lease is not being extended. Though this Court vide its order dated 24.07.2025 in W.P.No.1994 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 t -) SN,J wp--3995 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' therespondent-corporationissuedManualTenderNotification vlde Case No.C1l122(B) /2024-RM:NZB dated 03'02'2025 calling up fresh tender in respect of the DOT Stall No.4 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District' Aggrieved by the said action of the respo n dent-corpo ratio n, which is in clear violation of the orders of this Court, dated 24'Ol'2025 passed in W.P.No.1994 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 'O1.2025 vide No'LC/785(70)/2024- RM:NZB of the Regional Manager, Nizamabad i'e', respondent No.2 herein and contends that the order of this Court dated 24.OL.2025 passed in W.P.No.1994 of 2025 had been duly complied with and the request of the petitioner for extension of leaseperiodofDoTStallsforanotherfiveyearsinaccordanceto law had been reconsidered by the respondent corporation duly considering the specific plea of the petitioner that the petitioner ,; jr . .:-,,j 4 SN,J \,"p 3995 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 tor a further period of five years, cannot be accepted. s Takin o into con s derat on a) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing 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(7O)/202a-RM:NZB issued in compliance to the orders of this Court dated 24.01.2O25 passed in W.P.No.1994 ol 2025, The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said proceedings dated 07.O1.2025 issued by the respondent No.2-Regiona! Manager, TGSRTC, Nizamabad. In view of the fact as borne on record that the proceedings of the respondent ) SN..I wp 3995-2025 No.2 dated C/7.OL.2O25 had been issued in pursuance to the petationer 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 agaanst 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.Ot.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.SREERAMA MURTHY T REGTSTRAR ASS T //TRUE COPY// s CTION OFFICER c.rqtc Road Transport Corporation' Bus state Roac To, o' r rn",M"ffi9*?d,"",T',il?flf%T' ' 2. The Regional Manager' in'*'"' Nizamabad' Nizamabad District' 3. The Depot t"t'n'g"'' TGSRTC' Bansada Depot' Kamareddy District' 4. One CC to SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED OUADRI' Advocate [OPUCI 5. One CC to SRI R ANURAG' SC FOR TSRTC [OPUCI 6. Two CD CoPies BSFYBSK HIGH COURT DATED: 13102t2025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.3995 of 2025 1t{E s lA 16 a 19 l,14fl ?[t5 ( c o * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS o /-z /a ,/1 , t2