Justice Nimmagadda dismissed Writ Petitions 36989/2013 and 35075/2014 challenging manpower contract awards as infructuous. The court held the cause did not survive for further adjudication based on submissions by the petitioner's counsel.
No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.
♦
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVAT
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
'O ^
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER? M oo
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR c
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NOS: 36989 OF 2013 & 35075 OF 2014
WRIT PETITION NO: 36989 OF 2013
Between:
Sri Sai Master Constructions, Rep. by its Proprietor, Sri N.Satish S/o. Jagan Mohan Rao, Aged about 44 years. Door No.20-307/A, Brahmapuram, Machilipatnam, Krishna District
...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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action oftherespondents in awarding the contract of supply of manpower in favour of the unofficial respondents 6 & 7 without qualification, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of Indiaandconsequentlydeclare that the petitioner is entitled for awarding of thecontract of supply of manpower in preference to the unofficial respondents in respect of the works in the Depots of Respondents 3 to 5 in preference of unofficial respondents.
LA. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 46027 OF 2013)
Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supportofthe petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider for awarding the contract of supply of manpower in the Depots of Respondents 3 to 5 as per guidelines issued in CircularNo.23/2011-MED dt. 29.06.2011.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WVMP. NO: 3917 OF 2014)
Between:
...VACATE PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 5
AND
...RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER
...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT NO. 6 & 7
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 to vacate the interim orders dated 03-01-2014passed in W.P. M.P. No.46027 of 2013 in WP No. 36989 of 2013.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5: SRI P DURGA PRASAD(SC
FOR APSRTC)
Counsel for the Respondent No. 6: SMT. V SESHA KUMARI
Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRI T ARUNACHALAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 35075 OF 2014
Between:
Sri Sai Master Constructions, Rep. by its Proprietor,SriN.Satish,S/o.Jagan Mohan Rao, Aged about 45 years, DoorNo.20-307/A, Brahmapuram, Machilipatnam, Krishna District
...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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in awarding the contract in respect of the works notified in tender notice No.P1/122(02)/14-RM/K dt.20.08.2014 to the unofficial respondents contrary to the Circular No. 23/2011-MED, dt.29-06-2011 is wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled for awarding these works as per the Circular No. 23/2011-MED dt.29-06-2011.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 43875 OF 2014)
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 direct the respondents to award the contracts in respect of the works notified in tender notice No.P1/122(02)/14-RM/K, dt.20.08.2014 as per the Circular No. 23/2011-MED dt.29-06-2011.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KIRTHI TEJA KONDAVEETI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: SRI P DURGA PRASAD SC FOR APSRTC
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6: -— The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITON NOs.36989 of 2013 and 35075 of 2014
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learnedcounselfor the respondents.
- When the matters are taken up for hearing, Sri K.NarasimhaRao, learned counsel representing learned counsel for thepetitioner(s)submits that the cause in the present writ petitions does notsurvive for further adjudication and the matters becomes infructuous.
- Recording the said submission, these writ petitionsaredismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand
closed.
SD/- N.NAGAMIVIA //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER
To,
TF
HIGH COURT
DATED:21/11/2024
COMMON ORDER
WP.Nos.36989 of 2013 & 35075 of 2014
X 0 6 DEC 202'|
W0'
Current Section
DISMISSING THE W.P.s AS INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitions under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC are maintainable and do not survive for further adjudication.
Whether the cause of action has ceased to exist rendering the matters infructuous.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Sai Master Constructions
The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
