- (1.) BY the Court. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Q.H. Siddiqui, Advocate on behalf of Respondents No. 2 and 3 as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of Respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE controversy is no more res Integra. Petitioners are owners of Rick ­shaws and let out their Rickshaws on hire. Their grievance is that they should not be fastened with liability to pay Rs. 161 per Rickshaw per year, as licence fee and that they are prepared to pay Rs. 75 per Rickshaw. In Writ Petition No. 61911 of 2005, Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P and Ors., a Division Bench of this Court, considered aforesaid issue and passed order dated 26 -4 -2006; copy of the said order is Annexure 6 to the Writ Petition. A statement is made before us that this order has not been challenged and has become final. Relevant para 2 reads : "We have heard Counsel for the petitioner, the standing Counsel and Sri Q.H. Siddiqui for the respondents. Sri Q.H. Siddi ­qui made a statement before this Court that the persons who owns a Rickshaw and is driv ­ing the same, is exempted from paying licence fee. However, the persons who are doing business and letting out their Rick ­shaws, are required to deposit licence fee of Rs. 75 per Rickshaw per year and only this is being charged. In view of this, there is no necessity to issue any direction. In case any one is doing business of letting out Rick shaws and from him more than Rs. 75 per Rickshaw per year being charged, then he will of at liberty to file fresh writ petition."
(3.) IN the said order it is mentioned that any person who is doing business of letting out Rickshaws and from whom more than Rs. 75 per Rickshaw per year is charged shall be at liberty to file fresh Writ Petition.;