High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 09 TEL CK 2842

M/s. Pranava Advertising India Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Telangana & Ors.

Telangana High Court, Hyderabad · Decided on 11 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
B. Vijaysen Reddy, J · N.V. Shravan Kumar, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 30546 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 647 words

M/s. Pranava Advertising India Pvt. Ltd.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, in similar circumstances, this Court passed order in WP.No.2505 of 2026 dated 29.01.2026 and requested similar order be passed in the writ petition as well.

2.

In view of the above submission, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 29.01.2026 in WP.No.2505 of 2026 as under:

"Recording the submissions of learned counsel appearing for petitioner and respondents, without going into the merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation along with evidence showing payment of the prescribed advertisement fees in terms of the circular vide Lr.No.568/Advt/HYDRAA/2025 dated 04.03.2025 issued by respondent No.4 within a period of ten (10) days from today. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No.4 shall dispose of the same by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter. Pending such exercise, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. As it is stated by the learned Standing Counsel for GHMC and learned standing counsel for HYDRAA that flexies are not part of the contract awarded to the petitioner, the officials of GHMC and HYDRAA are at liberty to take action against the petitioner for removal of flexies in the subject places, by following due process of law."

The miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent No.2 in removing and / or attempting to remove the petitioners' authorized hoardings, flexies and advertisement structures, in respect of which advertisement tax has been paid up to 31.03.2023, despite the subsisting orders of this Court dated 12.03.2025 as amended on 14.07.2025 in W.P.No.7479 of 2025. A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent Nos.2 to 4 not to remove, dismantle, disturb or interfere with the petitioners' hoardings, flexies and advertisement structures pending formulation, notification and implementation of a uniform advertisement policy by the State Government.

2.

Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.1887 of 2026, dated 22.01.2026, and prayed to pass similar orders.

3.

Mr. G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 did not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

5.

Recording the submissions of learned counsel appearing for petitioner and respondents, without going into merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation along with evidence showing payment of the prescribed advertisement fees in terms of the circular vide Lr.No.568/Advt/HYDRAA/2025, dated 04.03.2025 issued by respondent No.4 within a period of ten (10) days from today. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No.4 shall dispose of the same by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks thereafter. Pending such exercise, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner.

6.

As it is stated by the learned Standing Counsel for GHMC and learned Standing Counsel for HYDRAA that flexies are not part of the contract awarded to the petitioner, the officials of GHMC and HYDRAA are at liberty to take action against the petitioner for removal of flexies in the subject places, by following due process of law.

7.

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications if any pending in this petition, shall stand closed.