Petitioner challenged respondents for not considering a tender schedule due to alleged blacklisting. The High Court held the petition infructuous upon submission by counsel and dismissed it without granting any relief or costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I
' I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 18644 OF 2017
Between:
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the impugned action of the respondents in not considering the tender schedule filed by the Petitioner's Agency on 19/05/2017 on the impermissible ground of its facing blacklisting by some other department and in contravention of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.11628/2017 on 26/04/2017 is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to process the tender schedule filed by the Petitioner's
vgency along with other tenderers for supply of essentialcommodities (Dais, Oils etc.,) following due procedure and awardcontract in favour of the Petitioner's Agency and to grant such other reliefor reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstancesofthecase.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017fWPMP. NO: 22746 OF 2017)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to stay all further proceedings, Onding disposal of writ petition and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. T S N SUDHAKAR
Counsel for the Respondents: 15541/GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP)
Counsel for the Respondents: NOOKA JAGANNADHAM
The Court made the following order:
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WPTT PFTITION No. 18644 of 2017
ORDER:
Sri T.S.N.Sudhakar, learned counsel representing M/s.K.Ram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cause in the writ petition doesnotsurvive infructuous and, hence, prayed to dismiss and it has become the writ petition.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, m this Writ SDI- S.SRINIVASA PRASAD Petition shall stand closed. assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTlOr^^OFFlCER
To,
1 One CC to SRI. T S N SUDHAKAR Advocate [OPUC] 15541/GP for social WELFARE (AP) Advocate 2 One CC to SRI. [OPUC] NOOKA JAGANNADHAM Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI.
Two CD Copies VAK
HIGH COURT
DATED:07/02/2024
ORDER
WP.No.18644of 2017
x>'
^3
f 2 7 JUN 202‘i ml
Current Seciio
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
M/s. Kendriya Bhandar
Mahatma Jyothiba Phule Andhra Pradesh Backward Classes Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society
The Joint Collector / Chairman, District Purchase Committee, Vizianagaram
V. SUJATHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
