1 APHC010014392014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 1519/2014 Between: 1. M/S.RAJA RAJESHWARI MINERALS, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 8-111, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR, KADAPA DISTRICT., REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY C.M.RAMA SUDHAKAR REDDY S/O.C.M.RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O.RAILWAY STATION ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR. 2. M/S.BALA TRIPURA SUNDARI MINERALS, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SY.NO.797, K.BUDUGUNTAPALLI (V&P), KODUR (M), KADAPA DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR S/O.C.M.PRADEEP REDDY S/O.C.M.RAMA SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGED ALMA 33 YEARS. R/O. RAILWAY STATION ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR. 3. M/S.C.M.SWETHA REDDY MINERALS, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SY.NO.797 & 798, K.BUDUGUNTAPALLI (V&P), RAILWAY KODUR (M), KADAPA DISTRICT., REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI C.M.PRADEEP REDDY S/O.C.M.RAMA SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O.RAILWAY STADES ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR. 4. M/S.C.M.RAMANATHA REDDY, PULVERISING MILL HAVING ITS OFFICE AT R.S.ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR-516 101, KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT., REP.BY ITS AUTHORTEED SIGNATORY C.M.PRADEEP REDDY S/O.C.M.RAMA SUDHAKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O.RAILWAY STATION ROAD, RAILWAY KODUR. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD REP. BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIECIOR, HO H.NO.6-2-915, HMWSSB PREMISES, 3RD FLOOR, REAR BLOCK, 2 KHAIRTHABAD, HYDERABAD 500 004 2. THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF A.P., A.P.MINERAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: No representation on behalf of the parties. 2. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under: <In the above circumstances, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or a writ more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the clauses as contained in the impugned Tender notification dt.10.01.2014 which was subsequently postponed to 21.01.2014 from 14:00 hours to 17:00 hours as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in violation of the subsisting agreements executed by the respondent No.1 corporation with the Petitioners and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.= 3. This Writ Petition is of the year 2014. The docket of this Court would indicate that this matter was listed only four times on the earlier occasion (24.01.2014, 28.01.2014, 04.02.2014 & 19.04.2017). There was no listing after this till date. 4. The above extract of the prayer itself would indicate that the Writ Petitioners have challenged the Tender Notification dated 10.01.2014 and 3 there was no Interim Order. The prayer itself would indicate that the cause of action does not survive. 5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 02.12.2025 Vns