Partly allowed

Abdul Kareem v. The Regional Manager

Telangana HC16 Aug 2023WP/21923/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the termination order against the petitioner upon receipt of an undertaking to pay rent on par with other hair saloon shops. The Court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's request to run a hair saloon shop in place of a Tiffin Centre within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 17.07.2023 set aside; respondents directed to consider petitioner's case to run hair saloon shop and pass orders within two weeks.

Abdul Kareem Vs The Regional Manager — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132521

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE^{SIXTEENTHDAY OF AUGUST} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY THREE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO^{N NO: 21923 OF 2023}

¶7

Between:

¶8

AbdulKareem,s/oAbdulPakeer'Age.43years,OccBusinessR/oH'No' 2 -2 -1621 A,SaiPur^{Tandur- 501141.} ...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The Reoional Manaqer, Telangana^{state RoadTransport Corporation,Ranga} Reddv Reoion. Mah-atma Gandhi Bus^{Station, Hyderabad.}

¶11

Z ine^/, etan6ani State^{RoadTransport Corporation,Repby its Vice Chairman} -, anJ llin,ding Director Bus Bhavin, Head Office at Musheeraad, Hyderabad t -20.

¶12

T6! Depot Manager,^{Telangana.stateRoadTransportcorporationTandur} Bus Station, Vikarabad

¶13

The State oi Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary Transport} Department, Secretariat. Hyderabad.

¶14

...RES'ONDENTS

¶15

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 issue a writ, order,^{or Direction, more particularly one in nature of} Writ of CERTIORARI^{calling for records pertaining to Final Ordersof Termination} vide No.P4l122(TDR-DOT-3)/2013-RR,^{dated171712023 issued by the} Respondent No.1 as bad^{in law and violation of principlesof natural justice and} issued under colorable^{exerciseof power and Quashthe Finalorders of} Termination vide^{No.P4l122(TDR-DOT-3)/2013-RR,dated171712023by} permitting the Petitioner to run the^{hair saloon shop in the place of Tiffincenter} in Shop No.03 , Tandur^{Bus Stand for the contractperiod , in the lnterest of} Justice

¶16

ANO:1OF2023

¶17

Petition under Section 151^{CPC praying that in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed^{in sqpportof the petition,the High Court maybe pleasedto} permit the Petitioner to^{run the hdir saloon shop in the place of Tiffin center in}

¶18

Shop No.03 , Tandur Bus Stand^{in the interest of Justice,PendingDisposal of} the Writ Petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl.^{N. V. R. RAJYA LAKSHMI}

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.^{1 to 3: SRl. THOOM SRINIVAS, SG FORTSRTC}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.4: GP FORTRANSPORT}

¶22

The Court made the^{following:ORDER}

¶23

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI^NANDA

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.21923 oF 2023

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the^{petitioner,learned} Standing Counsel for TSRTC appearing on^{behalf of} respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Government^Pleader for Transport appearing on behalf of respondent^No.4.

¶27

The petitioner approached the Court seeking the prayer as follows:

¶28

¶29

"To issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of CERTIORAR.I calling for records pertaining to Final Orders of Termlnation vide No.P4l122(TDR-DOT-3)/2013-RR, dated 17/7/2023 issued by the Respondent No.1 as bad in law and violation of^principles of natural justice and issued under colourable exercise of power and Quash the Final Orders of Termination vide No.P4l122(TDR-DOT-3)/2013-RR, dated 17/712023 by^permitting the Petitioner to run the hair Saloon shop in the^place of Tiffin Center in Shop No.03, Tandur Bus Stand for the contract period in the Interest of Justice and pass."

¶30

'_r

¶31

¶32

l-earned counsel for the petitioner filed an affidavit r".rhich reads as under:

¶33

"I submit that i filed the writ^petition aggrieved by the Firral Order of Termination vide Lr.No.P4/1.22(TDR-DOT-3)/2013-Rd cjated t7.07.2023 issued by the 1st respondent terminating the license granted for running businesr; of "TifFin Centre" in the stall No.DOT Shop No.3 at,TDR Bus Station (under the control of DM\TDR) is terminated w.e.f ., 17.07.2023 by invol<ing the agreement condition No.5.

¶34

I submit that the above Writ Petition came up for admission on 14.08.2023 for hearing) after hearing the both sides, the l-lon'ble Cor.rrt directed me to file an Affidavit to the effect that if I am ready to paylenhance the rent on par with other hair saloon shops at TDR Bus Sta tio n .

¶35

I submit that the respondent had mentioned in his order dated 12.06.2023, that I have not consented to the payrrent of enhanced amount when compared with other ha ir saloon shops.

¶36

Hence I hereby undertake to pay the enhanced rent on par with other hair saloon shops in TDR Bus Station.^"

¶37

A bare perusal of the order impugned dafed fi.07.2023 which is the Final Order of Termination against the petitioner clearly indicates that the only reason put-forth in the impugned order while passing the Final Orders of termination is that the petitioner offered lesser licensee fee of DOT stall No.3 at TDR Bus Station in comparison with existing stalls of same business (Hair Saloon) and therefore, his request to

t t

t I

change the business cannot be accepted in pursuance of the guidelines earmarked vide circular No.14l2000, OPD(C), dated 20.03.2000.

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit dated 15.08.2023, stating that the petitioner is ready to paylenhance the rent on par with other hair saloon shops at TDR Bus Station.

¶43

Duly considering the petitioner's undertaking filed by way of affidavit dated 15.08.2023 to pay the enhanced rent on par with other hair saloon shops in TDR, Bus Station, the impugned order dated 17.07.2023 is set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner to run the Hair Saloon shop in place of Tiffin Centre in the stall No.DOT Shop No.3 at TDR Bus Station and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, duly communicating the decision to the petitioner on the basis of the undertaking given by the petitioner that the petitioner would pay the enhanced rent on par with other hair saloon shops in TDR Bus Station.

¶44

{:. ,. :s'

¶45

With the above observations, the. writ petition

¶46

¶47

disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

Miscellaneous petitions, il' any, pending in this Writ

¶49

Petition, shall stand closecl.

¶50

sD/-T. TIRUMALA^pEVl ASSISTANT^REGISf,RAR

//TRUE^COPY//

tl sEcrloN^urrtcen

To,

1 The Reqional^{Manager' Telangana State Road.TransportCorporation' Ranga} "oiri d

¶55

l +is't^{,f,", P,'J. {lF m:} "^u's.f;^"':::},r rt,Irushe"eraad isii3o^{3!"e Hvderabad -20'Roadrran s po rt} 3 Corporation, The^{Depot Manaser, eus enauan'H"Xo} '"i';;;;'^di;[-iio'J 'i^i[nspo'corporationTandur

¶56

?H: Blil::l;y$"l,ll3lrrransport^{Department,secretariatHyd-erabad. _ _.}

¶57

", 5 Two CCs to^{GP roa r nf,li{p"oiilrr.g.hc",,t for the State of Telangana,at} Hvderabad i.3 ss' [OUT]$-xs, ul Ii"'^{3BYbA'+3?ilB'flJ,',?, [OUT]$-xs, ul Ii"'^{3BYbA'+3?ilB'flJ,',?,

¶58

g ffi Hvderabad i.3 ss' [OUT]$-xs, ul Ii"'^{3BYbA'+3?ilB'flJ,',?,

¶59

Two^{CD CoPies}

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1610912023

ORDER

?ir'- Si+il
/:.',,.)'
O
1t rus NB
i)
' -, t:.. _"

¶67

WP.No.21923 of²⁰²³

¶68

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

Abdul Kareem v. The Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Kareem v. The Regional Manager

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

Shakeel Ahmed Vs Smt.I.Rani Kumudini, IAS

M/S. Landmark Constructions Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.

Poosa Rajamani, Sec-Bad. Vs M/S. State Bank of India and 2 Ors.

Mr. Amer Hussain Vs The Union of India

Slg Fabricators Vs The State of Telangana

Saraswathi Sheri Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited