Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M/s. Morgan Enterprises – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana and Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 21760 of 2023
Decided On : 30-10-2023
LICENCE TERMINATION - PUBLIC INTEREST - MODERNIZATION OF PARKING SYSTEM - CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION - JUDICIAL REVIEW - WRIT PETITION - ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - PUBLIC POLICY, PUBLIC INTEREST, AND PUBLIC GOOD - SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE - ARBITRARY EXERCISE OF POWER - SHOW CAUSE NOTICE - NATURAL JUSTICE - CONTRACTUAL DISPUTES - REMEDIES UNDER ORDINARY CIVIL LAW - EQUITABLE JURISDICTION - DISCRETION - HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS - RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD - RIGHT TO OCCUPATION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a licensee of a parking stall at MGBS, Hyderabad, challenged the termination of his license by the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) for the purpose of modernizing the parking system. The petitioner argued that the termination was arbitrary, discriminatory, and violated his right to livelihood. The TSRTC contended that the termination was in accordance with the terms of the license agreement and was necessary for the public interest.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the termination of the petitioner's license was not arbitrary or discriminatory. The court found that the TSRTC had a legitimate interest in modernizing the parking system and that the termination of the petitioner's license was necessary to achieve this goal. The court also found that the petitioner had agreed to the terms of the license agreement, which allowed the TSRTC to terminate the license with three months' notice. The court further held that the petitioner's right to livelihood was not violated, as he could still pursue his business at another location.
Issues: 1. Whether the termination of the petitioner's license was arbitrary or discriminatory? 2. Whether the termination of the petitioner's license violated his right to livelihood? 3. Whether the TSRTC had a legitimate interest in modernizing the parking system?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the termination of the petitioner's license was not arbitrary or discriminatory because the TSRTC had a legitimate interest in modernizing the parking system and the termination was necessary to achieve this goal. 2. The court held that the termination of the petitioner's license did not violate his right to livelihood because he could still pursue his business at another location. 3. The court held that the TSRTC had a legitimate interest in modernizing the parking system because it would improve the efficiency and safety of the parking system and provide better service to the public.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition. However, the court directed the TSRTC to consider the petitioner's request to hand over the subject site of the stall to the petitioner after completion of the digitalization work for running the petitioner's business for the rest of the license period on humanitarian grounds.
ORDER :
Heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner Mr. Srinivas Kapatia and Learned Special Government Pleader Mr. Harendra Prasad appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Mr Thoom Srinivas, learned counsel for respondent 2 to 5.
2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings issued by the 4th respondent in connection with “notice for termination of license” issued vide No. P4/122(8)/2023-RR, dated 15.06.2023, in respect of the Stall No.94-A, at MGBS, without following due process of law, which is bad, illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, besides offending Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India by setting aside the said subject proceedings.
3. The case of the Petitioner in brief, is as follows:
b) Then the petitioner has become a successful bidder, wherein, his tender was accepted and finalized. In view of the successful bidding, the 4th Respondent, on 17.02.2023 executed a Deed of License in petitioner’s favour for a period of four (4) years for running Two-Wheeler Parking in open stall No.94-A (open area admeasuring to the extent of 12362 square feet) located at MGBS and the said Deed of License shall be operative for a period of four years commencing from 17.02.2023 and ending with 16.02.2027.
c) The Petition has become successful bidder by offering an amount of Rs.2,00,789/- per month and after due negotiations agreed to pay Rs.2,50,000/-. In compliance to the conditions of license, the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.21,92,500/-(Rs.18,97,500/- towards six months highest installments and Rs,2,50,000/- towards one-month installment in advance and also Rs.45,000/- towards GST).
d) After execution of said Deed of License, in compliance to the conditions of the license, the petitioner has erected the shed by duly purchasing the material from earlier contractor by incurring an amount of Rs.18,00,000/- towards protection of two wheelers in the specified parking area. After execution of the Deed of License, the petitioner has initiated the steps towards modernization of two-wheeler parking system for which the petitioner has purchased software and created an app “Park Web” to stream line parking system.
e) However, on 15.06.2023, respondent authorities without following due process of Law, issued “notice for termination of license,” vide No. P4/122/2023-RR, stating that the Corporation decided to provide modern digitalized parking system in MGBS Bus Station for better service to the customers for the parking of their vehicles and directed for the termination of the license with effect from 15.09.2023 and further directed the petitioner to vacate the premises on or before 15.09.2023.
f) As such, the subject proceedings have been issued without there being issuance of notice and without calling for any explanation, arbitrarily terminated the petitioner’s license without any valid reason. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.
4. The averments in the counter Affidavit filed by the Respondent No. 2 to 5, in brief are as under:
b) The Respondent Corporation wants to modernize its parking spac
The court held that the termination of a license by a public authority is not arbitrary or discriminatory if it is done in accordance with the terms of the license agreement and is necessary to achie....
The termination of a license agreement is valid if it is in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement, and the public interest outweighs the personal interest of the licensee.
The State and its instrumentalities, including the respondent Corporation, must act in a fair and reasonable manner, adhering to the principles of natural justice and fairness, even in the field of c....
Termination of a license without a show cause notice or consideration of refundable fees violates natural justice and judicial directives.
Corporation must evolve a mechanism for testing of veracity and validity of order passed by lowest or lower authority/officer by higher authority/officer with adherence of norms of Natural Justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
