The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.33848 of 2014 Dated 13.11.2014 Between: T.Ambika Rani …Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Executive Director, Greater Hyderabad Zone Jubilee Bus Station, Secunderabad and 2 others.
…Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mrs.B.Rajeswari for Mrs.K.V.Rajasree Counsel for the respondents: Mr.N.Vasudeva Reddy, SC for APSRTC The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in not removing the lock from Stall No.G4 at ECIL Bus Station and not permitting the petitioner to carry on popcorn business therein for non-payment of rent from 27-10-2013, as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard Mrs.B.Rajeswari, learned Counsel representing Mrs.K.V.Rajasree, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.N.Praveen Reddy, learned Counsel representing Mr.N.Vasudeva Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC.
In pursuance of notification, dated 08-02- 2013, issued by respondent No.1 for allotting open space of 60 square feet for carrying on business in a stall, designated as stall No.G4 at ECIL Bus Stand, Kushaiguda Depot, the petitioner has participated in the auction held on 03-04-2013. The petitioner’s offer was accepted under intimation, dated 07-06-2013, and on the same day, an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.3 for carrying on business in the stall up to 06-06-2018.
It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that the open space was not handed over to her till 27-10-
2013 and that in view of the same, she made a representation on 26-03-2014 requesting the respondents to collect the license fees from the date of opening the stall and not from the date of agreement. The said request was rejected by respondent No.3 on 28-05-2014. However, the petitioner has made another representation on 12- 08-2014 with the same request. Vide Letter No.01/122(02)/2013-KG, dated 01-10-2014, stated to have been received by the petitioner on 17-10- 2014, respondent No.3 has accepted the petitioner’s request to pay the rent from 27.10.2013 instead of from 07-06-2013, the date of the agreement. Accordingly, the petitioner was called upon to pay the sum of Rs.12,700/- per month towards arrears of license fees from 27.10.2013 within seven days.
The petitioner pleaded that as her representation was initially rejected by respondent No.3, she was not permitted to open the stall on the ground that she is in arrears of license fees and that therefore, there is no justification for respondent No.3 to insist on payment of arrears even from 27- 10-2013.
The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents- Corporation sought to support the action of respondent No.3.
No doubt, the petitioner has initially requested for waiver of arrears of license fees up to the date of handing over the site. The decision to waive the arrears appears to have been communicated to the petitioner only in October, 2014. Therefore, the petitioner feels aggrieved by the demand of arrears of license fees from 27-10-2013 also as she was, allegedly, not permitted to run the stall on the ground that she has not paid the arrears of license fees initially from the date of agreement and later from 27-10-2013.
Since the dispute relating to arrears of license fees arises out of a concluded contract and certain disputed questions of fact arise between the parties, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file a civil suit. However, I find no justification for the respondents not to permit the petitioner to commence business till now only on the ground of non-payment of arrears of license fees by the petitioner. Admittedly, the request of the petitioner for waiver of license fees was considered far too belatedly. In these facts and circumstances, equity lies in favour of the petitioner to be permitted to carry on business subject to certain reasonable terms pending adjudication of the issues raised by her in a properly instituted civil suit.
Accordingly, respondent No.3 is directed to forthwith permit the petitioner to commence the business in the stall allotted to her. The petitioner shall pay 50% of the arrears of license fees accrued for the period commencing from 27.10.2013 till date within one month without interest. The petitioner is permitted to file a civil suit before the civil Court of competent jurisdiction for adjudication of the issue relating to her liability to pay the arrears of license fees from 27-10-2013 within one month from today. On proof of filing of such suit, the respondents shall not insist on payment of the balance 50% of the arrears. If the petitioner fails to show proof of filing the suit, the respondents shall be free to demand the balance 50% arrears. It is made clear that the petitioner’s liability to pay the balance 50% arrears shall depend on the result of the suit.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, WPMP.No.42349 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 13th November, 2014
LUR