Allowed

A.Balaiah v. The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and 2 Other

Telangana HC11 Apr 2022WP/12288/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the termination of his shop licence by the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation as arbitrary. The court accepted an undertaking to remove encroachments and set aside the orders, permitting the petitioner to run business in Shop No. B-15. For Shop No. B-16, the court allowed the business but directed the authority to enhance the fee and remove

What did the court decide?

Impugned office orders set aside; petitioner permitted to run business in Shop No. B-15; fee enhancement directed for Shop No. B-16 pending removal of encroachments.

A.Balaiah Vs The Telangana State Road Transport… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

[/ONDAY ,THE ELEVENTH^{DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY TWO}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE A.ABHISHEKREDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:^{12288 OF 2022}

¶7

Between:

¶8

A.Balaiah, S/o.Agayya,^{aged about 56 years,Occ Business, R/o H'No'16-58'} subashnagar,^{HusriiOaO, Karimnagar District'}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Telangana^{State Road TransportCorporation, Rep by its Managing} Director, B-us Bhavan,^{Musheerabad, Hyderabad'}

¶12

The Reoional^{Manager,Telangana State RoadTransport Corporation Medak} Region,-Sangareddy,^{Sangareddy District'}

¶13

- The UusnaOaO Depot Bus^{Manager, D6pot, Husnabad, Karimnagar District'Telangana State Road Transport Corporation'}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article 226 of the constitutionof lndiapraying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavit filed therewith, the High courtmay be} pleasedtoissueanappropriateWrit,orderorDirectionmoreparticularlyinthe nature of writ of^{MANDAMUS declaringthe actionof the respondentsmore} particularly the action of the^{2nd respondent inissuing proceedings} No.P2l122(70)/2012-^{RM/N/Rfor shop No B/15 and No'P2l122(71y2012-RMilvlR} forshopNo.B.l6,inofficeordersdatedolto2l2o22respectivelyasarbitrary,and also violative^{of Articles 14, 21 , 300-4 of the constitutionof lndia and consequently} set aside the^{same and direct the respondentsto permitthe petitionerto run the} ShopNo.B.l5andB.,l6situatedinHusnabadBusstation,husnabad,Karimnagar DistrictaSperthetermsandconditionsofdeedoflicensedatedl8/08/2015.

¶16

NO: 10^F2022

¶17

Petition^{underSection 151 CPC praying thatin the circumstances statedin} the^{affidavitfiled in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to} suspend^{the impugned proceedings No No 'P2t122(70)t2012-RM/MRfor shop} No.15^{and No .pztlzz(71iro,r-**,**for shop No.8.16, in office ordersdated} orrozrzoz2respectivery^{issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposalof the} above^{writ petitionln this Hon'ble Court'}

¶18

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRl'RAVI KUMAR VADLAKONDA} Counsel^{for the Respondents:SRIA'RAVi BABU (SC FOR TSRTC)}

¶19

The^{Courtmade the following: ORDER}

¶20

I---_

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE A.ABHISHEK IIEDDY

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.12288 of 2022

¶23

ORDIR:

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnecl Standing Counsel ior'^'l elangana State Road I ransport Corporation. With their consent, the {rit Petition is disposecl of at the stage of admission itself

¶25

Sceking to tleclare. the actior-t of the respor-rdents, lllL)l^(' palticularly rcsponclcrrt No.2, in issuing the Office Orders rride No.t)2/122(70)/2012RN4/l\lR in respect of Shop.r No.B-15, and No.P2l122(71)/2072-RM/MR in rosp(.rrt of Shop No.B-16, datccl 01 ,02.2022 rcspectivt:ly, te-nninatinll his licencr:, as illc,galand arbitrary, the petitioner has filecl the present w.r.it petition

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has lilecl an undertaking affidavit dated 01.04.2022 to the effect thar he will abicle bv the terms ancl conclitions of the deeds of licence dated 18.08.2015 and will rerrove the encroachments/ occupation of the exh.a portion than the space rlentione.ci in deecls of licence datecl 18.08.2015 entered in respect of Shop Nos.ll-.15 and B-16 situated in Husnabad Bus Station, Husnabacl, Karimnagar Dish'ic t.

¶27

Having regard to llre rtbove, this Cor-rrt rs of tlre opir-rior-r that er-rds of justice rvoulcl be met if thc. irnpugned office orders are set aside

¶28

¶29

Accordingly, the impugned office orders are set aside and the petitioner is permitted to run the hotel busir-ress in Shop No.B-15 (6'.0" x 8'.0"). lnsofar' as Shop No.B-16 is concerned, even though licence was originally grarrted to the petitioner for running General Stole, it is alleged tha t the petitioner is l'unning hotel business ir-r the said shop. Therefore, the official respondents are free to enhance the licence fee on par with Shop.r No.B-15, after putting the petitioner on notice. It is rnade clear that the petitioncr shall rer-uove the tirr shed covering over the extra portiot-l other than the leased premises arrtl n ill not encroach any extra place other than the one arllotted to him anc{ shall stlictly conduct the business only ir1 the area allotted to him. The petitioner shall also abide by the other terms and conditions of the deeds of licence. Ir.r case there is any violation, the official respondents are free to take necessar.v action against the petitioner strictly h accordance rvith lar,,,. It is also n-rade clear that in case the official respondents enhance the licence fee, the petitioner

¶30

shall pav the enhanced rental amount in respect of Shop No.B-16,

¶31

The rvrit petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶32

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed, Thr.r.e

¶33

shall be no order as to costs

¶34

¶35

SD/.B.SATYAVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY' ( lt) SECTION OFFICER

¶36

To,

¶37

The Managing Director, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation,Bus Bhavan, [t/usheerabad, Hyderabad.

¶38

The Regional Manager, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. Medak Region, Sangareddy, Sangareddy District.

¶39

¶40

¶41

The^{Depotlr,4anager,Telangana State Road Transport Corporation'} " r-rr!n"ri,:J aus o6pot, nusiabad' Karimnagar District'

¶42

One CC^{to SRl. RAVI KUMAR VADLAKONDA Advocate IOPUCI}

¶43

5.oneCCtoSRl.ARAVIBABU(SCFoRTSRTC)AdvocatetoPuc]

¶44

Two CD^CoPies.

¶45

One^SPareCoPY.

GB _ SB .,}z-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1110412022

ORDER

l YiE s l4it
,1-
3 5 rlSMAY 2022
i
, !-^
\r1'z .rl
\ Y,,-.t5r.t* .! a. ./
-. -^, #r""

WP.No.12288 of 2022

DISPOSING OF THE^WP

WITHOUT COSTS.

..<br>

A.Balaiah v. The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and 2 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Balaiah v. The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and 2 Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gareeb Guide (Voluntary Organization) and another Vs Government of Telangana and 2 Others

Sherla Saritha Vs The State of Telangana

Vadla Gnaneshwari Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

M/s. Gaurav Contracts Co. Vs The Singareni Colleries Company Limited

Sri Sajja Rajasekhar Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Syed Nemathulla Vs The State of Telengana