APHC010632292013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 37153/2013 Between: 1. M/S.NAKSHATRA HOUSE KEEPING SERVICES,, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, K.SRINIVAS, S/O.BALAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, 397, LCH, SAIDABAD COLONY, SAIDABAD, HYDERABAD. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT OUTSORUCING COMMITTEE, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER CUM CONVENER, DISTRICT OUTSORUCING COMMITTEE, KADAPAM, KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. M/S KIRAN SERVICES AGENCY REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED AGENT, J. BALANARAYANA REDDY, SIO LATE JARANGA REDDY, 59 YEARS, R/O D.NO.12/1029, MAIN ROAD, PRODDATUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents in accepting the tender of the 3rd respondent, as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to Clause 3 of Terms and conditions of the Tender Notification dated 08-11-2013, consequently direct the 1st and 2nd Respondents to consider the Tender submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the fender Notification dated 08.11.201.3 and issue work order to the 2 Petitioner by treating the Tender submitted by the 3rd Respondent is ineligible in terms of Clause-3 in the interest of justice IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 46239 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider the tenders received pursuant to the Tender Notification dated 08-11-13 in terms of Clause 3 of the Terms and conditions and consider the eligible tenderers for issuance of work order as per the terms and conditions of the tender by suspending the proceedings if any in favour of the 3rd respondent accepting his tender, in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAMA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR 2. V R REDDY KOVVURI The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Ms. Ramadevi, learned counsel representing Sri G.Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and hence, the same is now rendered infructuous. 2. Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J Dated: 04.07.2025 SNI 3 334 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.37153 of 2013 Dated: 04.07.2025 SNI