Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6732 (AP)

HARIJANA COOP LABOUR CONTRACT SCTY,& 3 v. GOVT.OF AP,PRL.SCY,M.A.D,HYD,&ANOT

WP/21445/2014 · 2025-03-20

Nyapathy Vijay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010063912014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 21445 OF 2014 Between: Harijana Co-operative Labour Contract Society and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. T V SRI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ANCHA PANDURANGA RAO 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 21445 OF 2014 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 Condition Nos.2, 3, 11, 13, 23, 24 of the Tender Notification dt 23.07.2014 issued by the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the G.O.Rt.No.581 MA, dt 06.11.1996, G.O.Ms.No. 251 MA & UD (M2) Department dt 28.05.2002, G.O.Ms.No.52 MA & UD (M2) dt 18.03.2000 and Memo No.2054/J1/832 MA, dt 07.10.1983 and consequentially direct the 2nd Respondent to receive our Tenders as per the Tender Rules without insisting on the Condition Nos.2, 3, 11, 13, 23, 44 as per the Tender Rules and pass such other orders....” 2. A tender Notification dated 23.07.2014 issued by the 2nd respondent for providing workers for sanitation works for a period of 8 months i.e from 18.08.2014 to 31.03.2015 for 4 items of all Divisions in Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur District. In view of passage of time and changed circumstances, the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive for an adjudication by this Court. 3. 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: 20.03.2025 KK