THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.20807, 20996, 20883 and 21245 of 2011 Dated 28th September, 2011 Between: Sri Sri Sri Raja Parishuda Karmika Welfare Society and others …Petitioners (W.P.No.20807 of 2011) And Municipal Corporation of Guntur, rep.by its Commissioner, Guntur and another …Respondent (W.P.No.20807 of 2011) Counsel for the petitioners: Sri C.Venkat Yadav For Smt.V.Sujatha (W.P.No.20807 of 2011) Counsel for respondents: Sri T.Srinivas For Sri G.Tuhin Kumar (W.P.No.20807 of 2011) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Since common issues arise in all these writ petitions, they are being heard and disposed of together. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents. The petitioners are registered Societies comprising members belonging to SC and ST communities and involved in execution of sanitation works. In connection with tender notification, dated 18.07.2011, calling for tenders from registered Societies for execution of civil works in various divisions of Municipal Corporation of Guntur, the petitioners applied for tender schedules. They have requested the respondents to extend the benefit of exemption from payment of EMD as envisaged in G.O.Rt.No.269, dated 07.04.1998, and G.O.Ms.No.581, dated 06.11.1996, as modified by G.O.Ms.No.251, dated 28.05.2002. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite their eligibility, exemption from payment of EMD was not granted by the respondents. Their further grievance is that they were also not supplied the tender schedules free of cost as envisaged in the above G.Os. Counter affidavits have been filed by the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Guntur, wherein it is inter alia stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.269, dated 07.04.1998, exemption from payment of EMD towards participation in tenders is only for the Societies formed by the retired public health workers and badili workers and that as per the pleadings, none of the petitioners falls under the said category and hence, they are not entitled to the benefits under the said G.Os. It is further stated that tender notice, dated 18.07.2011, was cancelled for various reasons and the Municipal Corporation has again issued a revised short tender notice. It is further stated that even the said revised tender notice, dated 28.07.2011, is also cancelled as 33 contractors have intentionally quoted 0.01% less out of 40 packages. It is pleaded that with the cancellation of the original as well as the revised tenders, the cause in the writ petitions does not survive for adjudication. True it is, the cause of action on which the writ petitions are filed no longer survives for adjudication with the withdrawal of the original as well as the revised tenders. But, the problem relating to exemption from payment of EMD and supply of tender schedules free of cost to the petitioners continues to exist as and when fresh tender notices are issued. In order to obviate needless litigation, the petitioners are permitted to make representations to the Commissioner of respondent No.1-Municipal Corporation claiming the benefits under the above- mentioned G.Os., along with the supporting material, if any, within three weeks from today. On receipt of such representations, the Commissioner shall examine the same and pass a speaking order in the event he comes to the conclusion that the petitioners, all or any of them, are not entitled to exemption. If the petitioners feel aggrieved by the order that may be passed by the Commissioner, they shall be free to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law. Subject to the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petitions, interim orders, if any, granted in these writ petitions shall stand vacated and the interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th September, 2011 VGB