JUDGMENT : R.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. The present appeals have been filed for challenging the orders dated 15.04.2020, 20.04.2020, 15.04.2020 and 15.04.2020 passed by a learned Single in I.A. No. 1 of 2020 in W.P. No. 6540 of 2020, LA. No. 1 of 2020 in W.P. No. 6564 of 2020, I.A. No. 1 of 2020 in W.P. No. 6539 of 2020 and LA. No. 1 of 2020 in W.P. No. 6538 of 2020 respectively, whereby the learned Single Judge has stayed the widening of the road proposed by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and has further stayed the removal of the hoardings belonging to the petitioners. 2. Since all these appeals raise the same legal issues and identical arguments have been raised, all these appeals have been decided by this common judgment. 3. Mr. Durga Prasad, the learned counsel for the respondents, submits that the petitioners were granted three days' time to remove the hoardings. However, due to the lockdown being observed presently, there is a lack of labour. Moreover, the renewal forms have not been issued by the GHMC to perm it the petitioners to apply for renewal of their licence. Therefore, despite the fact that the notices have been served upon the petitioners, the petitioners find it extremely difficult to remove their hoardings. Lastly, the petitioners are willing to remove the hoardings provided the GHMC agrees to permit the petitioners to remove and install their hoardings at another nearby site. 4. On the other hand, Mr. B.S. Prasad, the learned Advocate General, submits that since a bottleneck is created at the particular locality, it is imperative that the road be widened so as to ease the flow of traffic for the public at large. Since there is a lockdown, since there is less traffic, it is appropriate time for the GHMC to carry out the widening of the road. For, once the lockdown is lifted, and the traffic is back on the road, it will be difficult for the GHMC to widen the road. Secondly, so far, the GHMC has not received any representation filed by the petitioners for expressing their willingness to shift their hoardings to another place. If such a representation were, indeed, made by the petitioners, the same shall be considered by the GHMC. Secondly, so far, the GHMC has not received any representation filed by the petitioners for expressing their willingness to shift their hoardings to another place. If such a representation were, indeed, made by the petitioners, the same shall be considered by the GHMC. Thirdly, since the petitioners find it difficult to dismantle the hoardings, the GHMC is willing to engage its own labour to dismantle, and to keep the hoardings safely till the decision is taken upon the representation made by the petitioners for shifting their hoardings, if permitted to do so by the GHMC. 5. Mr. Durga Prasad, the learned counsel for the respondents, expresses his apprehension that during the process of dismantling and while keeping the hoardings safe, the hoardings may be damaged due to the carelessness of the labour engaged by the GHMC. He claims that even in the past, when the hoardings were removed by the GHMC, the hoardings were damaged. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 7. This case requires that the interests of the public at large i.e. for widening of the road, should be balanced with the interests of the petitioners, who claim that they have a right to continue to have their hoardings at the present place. Since the public interest will override the interests of the individual, the necessity of widening the road cannot be questioned. Therefore, in order to safeguard the interests of the petitioners, this Court permits the petitioners to firstly, submit a representation before the Commissioner, GHMC with regard to their willingness to shift the hoardings to another spot. The Commissioner, GHMC is directed to consider the representation after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. In case, the petitioners are aggrieved by any adverse orders passed by the Commissioner, GHMC in not permitting them to shift their hoardings to another place, the petitioners shall be free to challenge the said order before this Court. 8. Secondly, this Court directs the GHMC to inform the petitioners about the date and the timing when the labour will be available at the place where the hoardings are standing today, so that the petitioners can also be present when the hoardings are being removed. 8. Secondly, this Court directs the GHMC to inform the petitioners about the date and the timing when the labour will be available at the place where the hoardings are standing today, so that the petitioners can also be present when the hoardings are being removed. Since the petitioners will need permission of the Police Department to leave their homes and to be present at the site, this Court directs the Police Department to issue the necessary pass/permission to the petitioners so as to enable them to be present when the hoardings are being dismantled. It is, hereby, clarified that the hoardings shall be dismantled only during the presence of the petitioners, and under the observations of the petitioners. Every effort should be made by GHMC to ensure that the hoardings are not damaged by the carelessness of their labour. Once the hoardings are removed, they shall be kept safely in the custody of the GHMC. 9. Lastly, the representation so filed by the petitioners shall be decided by the Commissioner, GHMC within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of the representation. 10. With these directions, the Writ Appeals stand disposed of. No order as to costs. 11. Miscellaneous Applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.