APHC010412292026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 960 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-10 [3584] M/s. Vardhini Group ...Appellant Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE LISA GILL SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 12th August 2026 Present : Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Arun Showri, G. Advocates for Respondents : GP for Transport – R1 to R3 GP for Revenue – R4 to R6 LISA GILL, CJ. Prayer in this Writ Appeal is for setting aside order dated 29.06.2026 passed by learned Single Bench, whereby writ petition filed by present appellant/writ petitioner has been dismissed. Appellant filed W.P.No.16004 of 2026 for declaring action of respondents in refunding Earnest Money Deposit submitted by it and cancelling the tender awarded in its favour without prior notice, an opportunity of hearing or passing a speaking order to be illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights of appellant. It was further prayed that the tender be restored in appellant's favour and, in the meantime, 2 W.A.No.960 of 2026 respondents be restrained from calling for fresh tenders for establishment of Automated Testing Station in Alluri Sitarama Raju (ASR) District of Andhra Pradesh. 2. Learned counsel for appellant submits that, in response to Request for Proposal dated 11.12.2025 issued by respondent No.2, appellant submitted its bid for establishment of Automated Testing Station at ASR District of Andhra Pradesh and deposited requisite Earnest Money Deposit of Rs.4,50,000/- along with bid processing fee of Rs.5,900/- and transaction fee of Rs.1,500/-, pursuant to which appellant was declared as successful bidder and tender was awarded in its favour. 3. Legal validity of land lease consent was sought to be examined by respondents. It was concluded that subject land was recorded in name of a tribal landholder belonging to Scheduled Tribe i.e. Gadaba community. Therefore, the lease transaction between a tribal landowner and a non-tribal entity was hit by prohibition contained in Sections 3(1)(a) and 3(1)(b) of A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959, (for short, ‘A.P.S.A.L.T. Regulation, 1959’). 4. While relying upon report submitted by concerned Tahsildar and Revenue Divisional Officer, Paderu, appellant’s bid was rejected vide communication dated 18.02.2026. Representation was submitted by appellant seeking reconsideration. However, without affording any opportunity of 3 W.A.No.960 of 2026 hearing, petitioner's Earnest Money Deposit was unilaterally refunded, leading to filing of above-said writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for appellant vehemently argues that learned Single Bench has erred in dismissing writ petition inasmuch as actual controversy was not even considered while making a reference to the factum of bifurcation of ASR district into two i.e. Polavaram District and Alluri Sitarama Raju District with effect from 31.12.2025. It is submitted that learned Single Bench observed that establishment of automated testing station is required to be established in both newly constituted districts and, therefore, it is now necessary in any case to issue fresh tenders separately for both districts, after withdrawal/cancellation of the earlier tender notification, and decision of respondents to this effect could not be assailed. 6. Furthermore, in case any opportunity had been afforded to appellant prior to passing of order dated 18.02.2026, the appellant would have been in a position to offer an alternate piece of land and it could very well be allowed to continue the tender in respect to ASR district. Tender in respect to Polavaram district could have been issued separately. It is thus prayed that this writ appeal be allowed as prayed for. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue Department has refuted the arguments as raised on behalf of appellant. Impugned order, it is submitted, has been correctly passed. It is further submitted that Revenue Divisional Officer and Tahsildar, Polavaram, had subsequently identified lands 4 W.A.No.960 of 2026 which were offered by appellant to be in possession of persons belonging to Scheduled Tribe - Konda Dora Caste, with both being assignees and had been issued D-Patta with said D-Patta holders expressing their willingness to relinquish their lands. However, subsequent to issuance of the tender notification, there was bifurcation of ASR district, as noted above. Accordingly, the work originally intended for a single district had to be bifurcated and undertaken separately for two districts; therefore, the decision to cancel/withdraw the existing tender itself was taken and fresh tender notifications were issued. Dismissal of this writ appeal is sought. 8. We have heard learned counsel for parties and have perused the file with their able assistance. 9. Issuance of tender; submission of bid by petitioner; acceptance thereof vide communication dated 09.01.2026 and subsequent rejection thereof on 18.02.2026 for reasons as noted in foregoing paras is a matter of record. 10. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to deny that tender in question has been cancelled/withdrawn by authorities on account of bifurcation of ASR District into two with effect from 31.12.2025, after issuance of Notice Inviting Tender dated 11.12.2025. 11. It is apparent that Automated Testing Station is required to be established in both newly constituted districts. Therefore, the earlier tender 5 W.A.No.960 of 2026 meant for erstwhile undivided district can necessarily not survive and has been correctly withdrawn/cancelled. Argument raised by learned counsel for appellant that its case should be reconsidered for ASR district as it stands now is clearly devoid of any merit. 12. Another argument raised by learned counsel for appellant was that pattadars’ voluntary surrender deeds on 26.05.2026 have curiously coincided with the date on which Earnest Money Deposit was refunded, thus, cancellation was timed to defeat an almost completed lawful process rather than an independent administrative necessity. 13. Learned counsel for appellant has been unable to substantiate these averments from the documents available on record. With bifurcation of said district, the requirements, terms and conditions of tender may be subject to variation. Decision to withdraw/cancel tender cannot be faulted. Learned Single Bench has further correctly held that appellant's case cannot be now considered in isolation on the basis of a subsequent development which indeed would result in discrimination qua other bidders who may have participated. 14. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to point out any illegality, infirmity or irregularity in impugned order dated 29.06.2026, which falls for interference by this Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. No other argument was addressed. 6 W.A.No.960 of 2026 15. In the given factual matrix, Writ Appeal is dismissed, being devoid of any merit. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. LISA GILL, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Whether the order is Speaking/Reasoned : Yes Whether the order is Reportable : Yes / No kbs 7 W.A.No.960 of 2026 119 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN W.A.No.960 of 2026 Dt: 12.08.2026 kbs