APHC010522432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 27085/2025 Between: 1. VEGA CONTRACTOR AND DEVELOPERS, REP. BY THE PROPRIETOR V. VINODH KUMAR, D.NO.8-9-308/1,2 LANE, NEHRU NAGAR, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. 2. GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER, KOTHAPETA, 0PP. GANDHI PARK, GUNTUR CITY GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 to issue any writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No.2 in issuing the impugned Notice ROC. No.853747/2024-25/ENG/8HD/GM dated 11.09.2025 to the Petitioners firm in a pre-determined way to blacklist the Petitioners firm without specifically disclosing what irregularities or malpractices has been committed by the Petitioners firm as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and against the rights of the Petitioners firm guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the 2 impugned Notice ROC. NO.853747/2024-25/ENG/8HD/GM dated 11.09.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pass an interim order by suspending the impugned Notice ROC. NO.853747/2024-25/ENG/8HD/GM dated 11.09.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2, until disposal of the above writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 ORDER:- The petitioner is challenging the impugned notice dated 11.09.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, and irrational. The impugned notice referred to certain manipulations/irregularities pertaining to tenders. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri A.S.C. Bose, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, submits that the impugned notice dated 11.09.2025 in the writ petition has been withdrawn, as the notice did not contain the details of manipulations/irregularities, and that the 2nd respondent will take further course of action as per law. The correspondence of the Commissioner of the 2nd respondent to the petitioner is placed on record. 3. Recording the same, this writ petition stands disposed of, leaving it open for the 2nd respondent to take steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 30.12.2025 PNS