( 1 ) SOME times, big questions are raised in small and simple cases. This is one of such cases. Arguments based on Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution were addressed to the Court explicitly, and the arguments based on Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution implicitly, to assail the action of the second respondent dated 27-9-1998 in issuing the tender notification calling for tenders for allotment of the Public Telephone Booth in Central Bus Station, Tirupathi.

( 2 ) THE facts are simple and they are: After calling for the tenders from the eligible persons, the petitioner was allotted a space in the Central Bus Station, tirupathi to run a Public Telephone Booth as licensee for a period of six years with effect from 17-11-1992 on payment of monthly licence fee of rs. 1080/- for the period from 17-11-1992 to 16-11-1995, and at the rate of rs. 1296/- per month for the period commencing from 17-11-1995 or 30% of the commission which the petitioner receives from the Telephone department, whichever is higher. The licence granted to the petitioner will come to an end on 17-11-1998. When the matter stood thus, the second respondent issued tender notification dated 27-9-19