1 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NOS:2867, 2870, 2892, 3045, 3096 & 3112 of 2026 COMMON ORDER: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking to declare the action of the respondents in evicting the petitioners from shop Nos.02, 07, 06, 08, 03 & 04, Dr.P.Anand DSA Mini Stadium, Ongole without considering and passing a detailed speaking order on the petitioners’ replies dated 05.01.2026 submitted in response to the notice dated 02.01.2026, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to set aside the notice issued by the 4th respondent dated 02.01.2026 and pass such other orders. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G.Sai Narayana Rao, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4. 3. Whereas, the relief claimed in all the writ petitions and respondents are common in all these Writ Petitions, hence, this Court is inclined to pass a common order in all the writ petitions and the facts stated at W.P.No.2867 of 2026 were drawn to pass this common order. 4. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is existing lessee in respect of Shop No. 02 at D.P.Anand DSA Mini 2 Stadium, Ongole. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Clause 1 of the lease agreement dated 28.09.2022, after completion of the existing lease period, the petitioner is entitled for renewal of lease for another period of three years subject to a condition of enhancing @ 33.33% upon the existing lease amount. In accordance with the conditions of lease agreement, the petitioner submitted his renewal application by endorsing his consent for enhancing like @ 33.33% upon existing lease amount for renewal of lease period for another period of three years. Even after submission of renewal applications/representations, without considering the same, the respondents are taking steps for eviction of petitioner. Having no other option, the petitioner approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.26960 of 2025, wherein this Court while disposing of the writ petition was pleased to pass final orders and directed the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders upon the petitioner’s renewal application. Till then, the petitioner could not be evicted from his respective premises. While so, without passing any orders as directed by this Court, respondent No.4 got evicted the petitioners forcefully and violated the orders of this Court. Further, respondent No.4 is taking steps to grant lease hold rights afresh, without considering the request of the petitioners for renewal as per the terms of the lease agreement. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3 5. Learned Standing Counsel for Sports Authority was directed to get instructions. As per the instructions, it is stated that respondent No.4 neither passed any speaking order as directed by this Court nor replied by way of any proceedings after receipt of the renewal application of the petitioner. He further submits that, in fact the petitioner along with others who are the petitioners in other writ petitions were already evicted from their respective premises, since the lease period was completed by the date of order of this Court. He further submits that so far the respondent No.4 not initiated any steps for conducting fresh auction for granting lease. He also submits that the petitioner and others have to pay arrears towards rental amount pertaining to previous lease period by such they violated the terms of the lease agreement. As such the petitioners are not entitled to seek for compliance of the terms of the lease agreement. 6. Heard both the learned counsel and perused the material placed on record. In fact, the petitioner is existing lessee and submitted an application for renewal of lease period as per the terms of the lease agreement. The Clause-I of the terms of the lease agreement dated 28.09.2022 is clear and specific that any existing lease holder is entitled to seek for renewal subject to giving consent for enhancing of lease amount at the rate of 33.33% upon the existing lease amount. It seems that accordingly, the petitioner submitted application giving consent for enhancing the lease amount for further 4 period of three years in terms of the lease agreement. Once, respondent No.4 is party to the lease agreement, the 4th respondent shall adhere to comply with the terms as mandatory. It is an admitted case of both parties, respondent No.4 is under obligation to consider the renewal applications much before to the completion of lease period. But for reasons best known to respondent No.4, he did not consider the same and forced the petitioners to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and caused for orders directing himself to dispose of the renewal applications of the petitioners within a period of four(4) weeks vide orders dated 26.09.2025. It is settled law once an authority suffered an order, the authority shall comply with the order of this Court without there being any deviation. But in the instant case, it appears that respondent No.4 for the reasons best known to him not complied with the order of this Court as directed. On the other hand, got evicted the petitioners in violation of orders of this Court. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to invoke appropriate proceedings for such violation or flouting orders if any by the respondent No.4. In this Writ Petition, this Court can direct respondent No.4 not to proceed with any auction to grant any fresh lease to others, other than to the petitioners, till disposal of their renewal applications dated 18.07.2025 in terms of the lease agreement. However, as contended by the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioners are at liberty to participate with the proposed 5 auction for granting lease hold rights by respondent No.4 either by public auction or by way of other known procedure as per the rules subject to clearance of their dues if any towards existing lease period. 7. In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are disposed of directing respondent Nos.3 and 4 not to grant any lease afresh in respect of petitioners’ premises without disposing the renewal applications of the petitioners and communicating the same to the petitioners. Further, the petitioners are hereby directed to clear the earlier dues/arrears amount, if any towards rent to the respondent No.4. On such clearance, the petitioners are at liberty to participate in auction afresh for granting lease hold rights. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 04.02.2026 TTPPSS 6 85 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NOS:2867, 2870, 2892, 3045, 3096 & 3112 of 2026 04.02.2026 TTPPSS