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 rssue a writ or order or directlon, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent dated 06.08 2024 in terminating the licence of the petitioner in respect of his Stalt Bakery and Sweets bearrng Stall No.21 in JBS, Secunderabad is highly unwarranted. unJUSt, highly arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, illegal and unsustainable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pteased to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to run his Bakery and Sweet Stall bearing Stall No.21 in JBS, Secunderabad, by suspending the operation of the order of the 2nd respondent dated 06.08.2024 terminating the licence of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. C. RAMACHANDRA RAJU Counsel for the Respondents: SRt R. ANURAG (SC FOR TSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.22288 oF 2lJ24 ORD ER: Heard Sri C.Ramachandra Raju, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TGRTC, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2 The oetitioner aooroached the Court s ekino oraver as under: ". to issue a writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondr:nt dated 06.08.2024 in terminating the licence of the petitioner in respect of his Stall Bakery and Sweets bearing Stall No.21 in lBS, Secunderabad is highly untvarranted, unjust, highly, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, illegal and unsustainable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India; and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstan,:es of the ca se. "

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner was granted a license to run a bakery and sweets stall bearlng j I i I I I I I I i 2 SN.J w 22288_2024 Stall No.21 at Jubilee Bus Statiofl (JBS), Hyderabad, for a period of 5 years, from December 21,202I, to December 20,2026.The respondent No.2 issued a show_cause notice dated 1g.07.2024 to the petitioner stating that one wo,m€n passenger had made a complaint to the Head Constable at Jubilee Bus station stating that at early hours on 09.07.2024, one Basavaraj, the worker of stall No.21 had misbehaved with her by insisting her to tatk to his owner Sri Ganesh by Video Call through smart phone, for which, she refused and hence, the said show_cause notice had been issued to the petitioner.

4. It is the further specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner submitted explanation dated 25.07.2024 to the respondent No.2, wherein the petitioner specifically stated that the said Basavaraj is not his worker and further, the petitioner shop was closed at 00.00 hours on the said date. However, without considering the petitioner,s detailed explanation dated 25.07.2024, the order impugned dated 06.08.2024 had been passed by the respondent No.2 terminating the license of the petitroner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 3 SN,J w_22288-2024 Cou d L4. interim orders in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in W.P.No.22 88 of 2O24 in favou rofth e oetitione r observinq as under: "Taking into consideration the fact as borne on record that the impugned proceedings dated 06.08.2024 of the 2nd respondent does not indicate any consideration of petitioner's explanatioll dated 25.O7.2024, submitted by the petitioner in response to the Show Cause Notice for termination oF licelce dated lB.O7 .2024, issued to the petrtioner there shall be stay of the operation of the order of respondent No.2 dated 06.08.2024 till 20.08.2024 and the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to run Bakery and Sweets bearing stall No.21 in lBS, Secunderabad, in the mea ntime. " PERUSED THE RECORD r va nt ortion he im u At}aA o6.o8.2 )A is cr rarl lrrr +he res t N .2 to iha etition rhe xtract d here nd "You have submitted explanation vide reference 6th cited where in stated that the Baswaraj is; not your worker and your shop was closed at 00.00 hrs. But, as per reports of SSI, RHC & Controller of PKT !.repot it is clear that the above incident happened in the Stall a i I i i I l ! I I I I I I I : : 4 SN,J wp_22288 2024 No.21. Hence, the explanation submitted by you is not correct & not valid. Thus, you have violated clause No.2g(a)(vi) of agreement executed by you. Therefore, the license granted to you to run the business of "Bakery & Sweets,' in stall No.21 at JBS (under the control of DM/PKT) is hereby TERMINATED WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT as per the agreement condition No.2B(a)(vi) duly forfeiting your balance security deposit in favour of the Corporation after adjusting the Security Deposit amount towards all dues payable to the Corporation including financial losses that might arise on account of such premature termination vide Item No.28(i)(ix) of agreement, in case of shortfall you have to pay all the due amount to the Corporation. Please acknowledge the receipt.,,

7. As observed in the interim orders of this Court dated 1,4.08.2024 and as borne on record the impugned proceedings of the respondent No.2 dated 06.08.2024 does not indicate any consideration of petitioner's explanation dated 25.07.2024 submitted by the petitioner in response to the show-cause notice for termination of license dated tB.O7.ZO24 issued to the petitioner herein, nor there is any finding arrived at in so far as 5 SN,J ,Np 22288)024 the specific plea of the petitioner is concerned that the said Basavaraj is not his worker and the said shop was closed at 00.00 hours on the said date and the impugned order dated

06.08.2024terminatingthelicenseofthepetitionerhadbeen passed in clear violation of the principles of natural iustice' 8 Ta nq in co nsider tion: a) The facts and circumstances of the case' put-forth bY the learned b) The submissions of the Petitioner and the counset aPPearing on behalf learned Standing counsel for TGSRTC appearing on behalf of the resPondents, c) The contents of the impugned proceedings datedo6.os.2o24issuedbYtherespondentNo.2tothe petitaoner herein, d) The fact as borne on record that the impugned proceedings dated O6'O8'2024 does not indicate any considerationoftheexplanationofthepetitionerdated 25.07.2(,24 in response to the show-cause notice dated tS.oT.2f/24issuedtothepetitionerbytherespondent No.2noritrecordsanyclearfindingthroughitsreasons i |. ! I I I ! t I I i i ! ! . i I 6 SN,J w_22288_2024 on the specific pleas put_forth by the petitioner through petationer,s explanation and, The writ petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings dated O6.Og.2O24 issued by the respondent No.2 to the petitioner herein is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2 to reconsider the explanation dated 2S.O7.2O24 submitted by the petitaoner in response to the show_ca use notice datecl :lg.O7 .2024 issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.2 for termination of license of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order duty considering alr the preas put-forth by the petitioner in the said explanation dated 2S.O7.2024 by giving a clear reasoned finding on the sa id pteas ra ised by the petitioner in the said explanation, Tait the above exercise is initiated and concluded as per the directions as indicated as above within the time period as stipurated as above and appropriate orders passed by the respondent No.2 by duly considering the petitioner,s explanataon dated 25.07.2024, interim orders granted by this Court on I I ) I I tI t I I /t I t 7 SN,J wp 22288_2024 L4.OA.2O24 in I.A.No.1 ot 2024(relerred to and extracted above) in the present writ petition shall remain in force. 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. -o6PUw REG SD/- K. AMMAJI ISTRAR To, I //TRUECOPY// ,\ t\ 'r\ - i 'sECnoN o 1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Tetangana \jt" Rouo fr"n"p - Corporation, Bus Bhavan, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Reglonal Manager, Telangana State R6ad Transporl Corporation, 3. One CC to SRl. C. RAMACHANDRA RAJU, Advocate [3pUC] 4. One CC to SRl. R. ANURAG ,(SC FOR TSRTC) [OpUa:] 5. Two CD Copies Reddy Region, MGBS, Hyderabad. FFICER Ranga BM GJP (t' t HIGH COURT DATED:20102t2025 --'1:= i.r u E SI4 C( $ ( z a ,+ L) ) '+ \j \ 1 I JUN 2t[5 l- '-1, . ,. ,,ri -'.-- -- ,t =t2 ORDER WP.No.22288 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS fr- 30 2t i I ; i t Ii 1: I ! 1 ! I f i I ! a I I F I t i t. E f 4 ! , c $ €