( 1 ) THE petitioners were granted licences to run the stalls, to undertake various activities, in the premises of the Court of Chief metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, hyderabad. The period of the licences had expired. The second respondent issued notices, dated 03-07-2007, requiring the petitioners to vacate the premises within 15 days. The petitioners challenge the same, alleging that they are all unemployed and solely depending upon the activities undertaken in the stalls being run. It is also stated that apart from providing livelihood to them, the stalls are providing facilities to the advocates and the litigant public. They plead that their licences deserve to be extended. ( 2 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the High Court. ( 3 ) IT is not in dispute that the period of licences granted to the petitioners had expired. The High Court has taken a policy decision, not to allow any shops in the premises of any court, throughout the State, in view of the shortage of space and increase in the number of Advocates and visitors to the Courts. In this context, that the petitioners were required to vacate the premises. Once the policy decision has been taken by the High Court, no exception can be carved out in favour of the petitioners, howsoever deserving they may be. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the notices issued to the petitioners. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that his clients may be granted reasonable time to vacate the premises. It is also represented that adequate time is needed to make alternative arrangements. ( 5 ) HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, granting time to the petitioners till 30th August 2007, to vacate the premises. There shall be no order as to costs. .