G. Sravan Kumar vs. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (Tsrtc)

Facts

The petitioner, G. Sravan Kumar, was granted a license to operate a food court stall (Shop No. 18) at the Jangaon Bus Station on August 1, 2019, for five years. This license was extended until December 31, 2025, due to losses incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the expiry of the extended period, the petitioner sought a further three-month extension or until a new tender was allotted, offering an increased fee. The 4th respondent (Depot Manager, TSRTC Jangaon) allegedly ignored this request and issued eviction proceedings dated September 24, 2025, while suppressing earlier proceedings dated August 28, 2025, which purportedly allowed the petitioner to continue under Clause 28 of the License Deed. The petitioner contended this action was illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and violated his constitutional rights.

Held

The Court dismissed the writ petition. The primary reason for dismissal was the submission by the respondents of written instructions confirming that a new license for Food Court Stall No. 18 at Jangaon Depot had been executed in favour of Mr. K. Sudheer Kumar. This new license was for a period from October 10, 2025, to October 9, 2030, with a monthly license fee of Rs. 68,000, excluding additional charges. The Court found that in light of this fresh license agreement, the petitioner had no subsisting right to seek the continuation of his earlier license. Consequently, the Court held that the actions of the respondents could not be termed arbitrary or illegal. The petitioner's claims of illegality, arbitrariness, and discrimination were not substantiated in the face of the new contractual arrangement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the eviction proceedings issued by the 4th respondent, dated September 24, 2025, are illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India, by suppressing earlier proceedings dated August 28, 2025, and denying the petitioner a continuation of his license as per Clause 28 of the Deed of License. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the eviction proceedings were illegal and arbitrary as they suppressed prior communications allowing continuation and discriminated against him compared to other licensees who allegedly received extensions under Clause 28. He sought a declaration of illegality and continuation of his license until a new tender was allotted. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents, represented by TSRTC's standing counsel, submitted written instructions stating that a new license for Food Court Stall No. 18 at Jangaon Depot had been awarded to Mr. K. Sudheer Kumar for the period October 10, 2025, to October 9, 2030, with a monthly license fee of Rs. 68,000 (excluding electricity, water, GST, and maintenance). Based on this, they contended that the writ petition had no merit.