APHC010378992015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 27462 Between: P. Veerababu, and Others The State Of A P and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G TUHIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 27462 OF 2015 P. Veerababu, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): Counsel for the Respondent(S): ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 27462 OF 2015 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the impugned Tender Notification issued by the 2ND respondent dt 23.01.2015 vide Roc.No.0131/2015-E2 (in respect of Roc.No.0127/2015-E2 construction of Community Hall at 21St Division Jagannadhapuram Fish Market, Kakinada, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass such other orders....” 2. The respondent No.2 had issued Tender Notification through e- procurement platform for construction of the Community Hall in the parking area and estimated value being Rs. 8,52,481/-. No interim order has been passed by this Court. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents placed on record the Written Instructions dated 19.01.2016 issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, wherein it was stated that the construction was nearing completion at the cost of Rs. 6,30,921/-. 4. Recording the said submission and changed circumstances, the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive for an adjudication by this Court. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 21.03.2025 KK