JUDGMENT V. K. Mehrotra, J—When the case was taken up today Shri Bhupinder Gupta appeared for the second respondent and told us that from the record made available to him, which was in his possession, it could not be discovered that preference was given to Shri Dina Nath for allotment of the stall on the ground that he was an unemployed graduate, as is the suggestion contained in para 2 of the supplementary reply sworn by Shri Tarsem Singh, Secretary Municipal Committee, Kullu, on 9th May 1989. 2. Our attention has been drawn to "Leasing Out of Stalls Construted by Municipalities in Himachal Pradesh Rules, 1972" framed by the State Government in exercise of the powers under sections 255 and 273 of the H. P Municipal Act, 1968. In these Rules there is no provision in regard to any genera! notice being given to people before proceedings are taken to lease out the stalls constructed by the municipality. Rule 9, which provides for priorities for allotment of stalls to certain categories of persons, does not provide for any preference to "unemployed graduates as such. Besides, frcm the averments made in the various affidavits filed in this case it appears clear that allotment was made in favour of Dina Nath primarily on account of the recommendation made in his favour by the then Honble Minister Incharge of Tourism Department. 3. Rule 5 of the above mentioned Rules provides that : "The term of lease in the first instance shall be for one year : provided that the lessee may renew the lease for another year; and so on." This would suggest that the legal efficacy of the lease enures, at any point of time, for a period of one year from the date of its grant or renewal. 4. The case of the petitioner does not appear to have been considered for allotment of the stall in accordance with the aforesaid Rules at any point of time We feel inclined to direct that before the lease in respect of the stall in question comes to be renewed in favour of Dina Nath next, the case of the petitioner as well as Dina Nath shall be considered by the Municipal Committee afresh in accordance with the Rules before renewing the lease in favour of Dina Nath. 5. 5. We also feel that as and when any stall is constructed hereafter by the Municipal Committee or any existing stall becomes available for fresh allotment, the case of the petitioner shall be considered for the allotment thereof, if he is otherwise found eligible for it. on a priority basis. We also feel that the State Government should, either by issuance of executive instructions or by necessary amendment in the Rules aforesaid, provide for public notice regarding the availability of any shop for allotment under the Rules so that it may not be possible for any person claiming allotment of a stall to complain about lack of knowledge about the fact that a particular shop had become available for allotment to eligible persons under the Rules. This should be done, as far as possible, within three months. 6. The petition shall stand disposed of finally with the aforesaid directions. The petitioner will be entitled to his costs from the second respondent which we assess at Rs. 500. 7. A copy of this judgment shall be made available to learned Counsel for all the parties Dasti on usual terms. Order accordingly.