The High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the impugned Manuar render Notification vide case No.c1t122(8)12024-RM.NzB dated.03.02.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of Dor stail No.17 of rndira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District, which was constructed under DOT (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 'llon'ble court in wp No.1777t2o2s dated.24.or.2o2s, is highry iflegar, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutionar, and in violation of principles of naturar justice, and set aside the same to extent of petitioner's case is concerned, and consequently direct the respondents herein to extend the ricense period for remaining period of five (5) years in respect of subject stall. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, thp High court may, be pleased to suspend the impugned Manual render Notification vide case No.c1t122(B)t2024- RM.NzB dated.03.02 .2o2 5 issued by the 2nd respondent to extent of petitioner,s case is concernec, by directing the respondents to extend the license to the petitioner for remaining period of five (5) years from 01 .o1 .202s onwards in respect of Dor Stall No.'l 7 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. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRt. MOHD MO|N AHMED QUADRI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.ANURAG, (SC FOR TSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER { ,,,: o HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA w RIT P TIO No.4L720F 2025 ORD E R: Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri' learned counsel appearlng on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R'Anurag' learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC' appearing on behalf of the resPondents. t u r 2 Th a unde r: iSSUE *...to one in or direction more a writ, order Writ of Mandamus the nature of particularlY declaring the impugned Manual Tender Notification vide Case No'CU122(8)17024-RM:NZB dated 03'02'2025 issued by the 2nd respondent calling up fresh tender in respect of DOT Stall No'17 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.1777l2O25 dated:24' O1-'2025' is hlghly illegal' arbitrary, uniust, u nconstitutiona l' 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 wD 4172 2025 in respect of subject stall, and te pass such othe. order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems f,it and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. The c,3se 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 tstand. 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 perio,J 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 (51 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 lease 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 24.0-,1.2025 in W.p.No.U77 of 2025, direr:ted 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 w_4112_2025 December, 2029 within a period of two (02) weeks from the date ofthesaidorderandtillsuchtime,therespondentswere directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject stall' the respondent-co rporation issued Manual Tender Notification vide Case No.C11122(B) /2024-Rlq:NZB dated 03'02'2025 calling up fresh tender in respect of the DOT Stall No'17 of Indira RTC Bus Stand, Banswada, Kamareddy District' Aggrieved by the said action of the respondent-corporation' which is in clear violation of the orders of this Court, dated 24'Ol'2025 passed in W.P.No.1777 of 2025, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing appearing on behalf of the resPondents Counsel for TSRTC placed on record the No.LCl7Bs(70)/2024-

07.01.2025 vide , respondent proceedings dated RM:NZB of the Regional Manager, Nizainabad i'e No.2 herein and contends that the order of this 24.01.2025 passed in W.P'No'1777 of 2025 had been dulv 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 Court dated 4 a SN,J \ ,p_4112 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. 5 Takinq into consider tion: a) The submissions made by the learned caunsel 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.O1.2025 vide No.LCl785(tO)/2O24-RM:NZB issued in compliance to the orders of this Court dated 24.O1.2025 passed in W.p.No.t77Z of 2025, The writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said proceedings dated 07.OL.2(J25 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 wp-4172 2025 No.2 dated fl7.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 fl7.OL.2O25- 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 clo,sed' ' .---..-- SD/-K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TTRUE COPY// ON OFFICER To, 1 . The Managing Director, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation' Bus efravin, RTcIX-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) [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies BSKiBSK w HIGH COURT DATED:1310212025 CC TODAY i HE SI4 o({ o ':|) 1s t4|\fl 2ffi ORDER WP.No.4172 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS \11?vr