E;3ilff#igda v. Telansana State Road Tra"tq9l Sglp^?I3tion'

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)I2024-RM'NZB dated'O3tO2t2)25 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Statl No'21 of lndira RTC Bus Stand' Banswada, Kamareddy District' which was constructed under DOT (Deposit' Operate and TransfeQ scheme' in the year' 2007' without reconsidering the request of the petitioner for extension of lease' and contrary to directions issued bythisHonourableCourtinWPNo.,t854l2o2idated'24toll2o2',ishighlyillegal' arbitrary,unjust,unconstitutional,andinviolationofprinciplesofnaturaljustice' and set aside the same to extent of petitioner's case is concerned' and consequentlydirecttherespondentshereintoextendthelicenseperiodfor remaining period of five (5) years in respect of subject stall' IA NO:10F2025 Petition under section '151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the Jrigh court may be preased to suspend the impugned Manuar render Notification vide case No.c1/122(8)12024_ RM NZB dated'o3t02r2025 issued by the 2nd respondent to extent 0f petitioner s case is concerned, by directing the respondents to extend the ricense to the petitioner for remaining period of five (5) years from o1/01t2025 .nwards in respect of Dor Sta, No.2.l of rndira 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. Counsel for the petitioner: SRlll/IOHD MOIN AHMED eUADRI i;Jt'.11T:1""H?s,?$l"t:B[,#-A'ffi ila:5""o*rsRrc HON,BLE MRS ]USTICE SUREPALLI NANDA RI P ET ON 7 F 2o2 ORDER: appearl Heard Sri Mohd' Moin Ahmed Quadri' learned counsel n9 on behalf of the Pet'tioner and Sri R'Anurag' learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC' appearing on behalf of the resPondents' 2 h e r r h o r r asu er: "...to issue a writ' order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned t'lanual Tender Notification vide dated 03'O2'2025 Case No.C11122(B)/2024-RM:NZB issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No'21 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 directionsissuedbythisHon,bleCourtinWP No.1854/2025 dated:24' Ot'2025' is highlv illegal' arbitrary, unjust' u nco nstitutional' and in violation of principles of natural iustice' and set aside the same to extent of petitioner's case is concerned' and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend thelicenseperiodforremainingperiodoffive(5)years /. 2 SN,J \tp 4127 2025 rn respect of subject stall, and !o pass such othetr 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 doing business at road margin of RTC Bus :jtand. 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 buirding under Do-t Scheme for a period of twenty (20) years, for which the petitioner agreed. After completion of construction of shops, initially, the petitioner was qranted the lease for a period of five (5) years on a fair monthly rent and the said lease was extencied Frorn time to time, and was valid till the end of December,2024. It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is rurther entired For getting remaining five (5) years lease i.e., upto, Decembelr,2029 as per resolution No.t33/2OO7, dated 24.L0.2OO7, howerrer, the said lease is not being extended. Though this Court vide its order dated 24.0L.2025 in W.p.No.1854 of 2025, directi:d the respondents to re_consider the case of the petitioner for extension of ft:ase for further period of five years up to J SN,J wp_4127 2025 December, 2029 within of the said order and a period of two (02) weeks from the date till such time, the respondents were to dispossess the petitioner from the subject stall' directed not the. respondent-corporation issued Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C11122(B) / 2024-Rtvl:NZB dated 03'02'2025 calling up fresh tender in respect of the DOT Stall No'21 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District. Aggrieved bY the said action of the respondent-corporation ' which is in clear violation oftheordersofthisCourt,dated24.0l.2025passedin W.P.No.1854 of 2025' the petitioner filed the present writ I I petition.

4. Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing appearing on behalf of the resPondents Counsel for TSRTC placed on record the No.LCl785(70)/2024-

07.Ot.2025 vide proceedings dated RM:NZB of the Regional Manager' Nizamabad l.e , resPondent Court dated No.2 herein and contends that the order of this 24.0t.2O25 Passed in W.P.No.1B54 ot 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 petitioner that the Petitioner considering the specific plea of the \/ 4 SN,J wp 4127 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 petitionr3r to run petitioner's business for a further period of five years, cannot be accepted 5 Ta tno tn oco nsider tao n: t a) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counset for TSRTC appearing on behalf of the respondent_corporation and, b) The proceedings of respondent No.2 dated 07.OL.2O2S vide No.LCl785(7O)/2(,24_Rtvt:NZB issued in compliance to the orders of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in W.p.No.tB54 of 2(125, The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to chaltenge the said proceedings dated 07.O1.2025 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_4127 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 |J7.O1.2[25'However' there shall be no order as to costs' As a sequel' the miscellaneous petitions' if any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed' //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. S SRINIVAS REDDY TANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER Director, Telangana State Road Tran RTC-X-Road, Hvd ,TG

1. The Man erabad Bhavan, SRTC, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District' The Regional Manag The DePot Manager, TGSRTC, BA nswada DePot, Kama reddy Distri te [OPUC] One CC to SRI MOH D MOIN AHM ED OUADRI, Advoca One CC to SRI R.AN URAG, SC FOn rsnrc toPUCl Two CD CoPies ct. Corporation, Bus To PS 2 3 4 5 6 K, HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED:1 3t02t2oZs \ trE STA re. .( 19 tlAR ?tffi z ? 1-) ) + \-* \.\ r ,|...,. ..- ,.t.), . <-;-; * ORDER WP.No.4I2t of 2O2S \ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I / / ?