APHC010740842017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19993/2017 Between: M/s. Stan Power, ...PETITIONER AND State Of A P Municipal Administration Urban Development and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V M M CHARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY(SC FOR GVMC) 3. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 4. V V SATISH The Court made the following: 2 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.19993 of 2017 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed declaring the termination orders passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 30.05.2017 vide RC.No.15272/2013/ACP (Advt.) adverting to various reasons which were not raised in the show cause notice dated 30.01.2017 without considering the reply dated 08.02.2017 submitted by the petitioner in violation of the principles of natural justice in respect of a Build Operation and Transfer (BOT) contract dated 18.03.2013 entered between the petitioner and the respondent Nos.2 & 3 for ‘Installation of Modern Traffic Signals with Intelligent Video Surveillance System’ and advertisement hoardings at various junctions in the city of Visakhapatnam, falsely attributing violation of the terms of contract thereby causing huge loss of more than Rupees 30 crores and seeking to expel the petitioner without deriving any revenue from the contract as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the principles of Public Private Partnership (PPP) and natural justice causing huge and irrecoverable loss to the petitioner. 2. The contract in question was for a period of seven (07) years. This Court on 20.06.2017, passed interim orders keeping the impugned order of termination in abeyance. 3 3. In view of passage of time, the original contract period between the parties had lapsed and in that view, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY,J Date: 22.04.2025 SCS 4 58 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19993/2017 DATE:- 22.04.2025 SCS