THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.23255 OF 2009 2nd November 2009 Between: Berach SC & ST Sanitary Workers Welfare Society, Reg.No.130 of2007, Guntur, rep.by its Secretary, Kota Rajeev Kumar and three others. …PETITIONERS AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad and one other. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.23255 OF 2009 ORDER: The Municipal Corporation, Guntur, issued a tender notice dated 08.12.2008 inviting tenders for award of Sanitary Works in various wards for a period of one year. The petitioners emerged as successful tenderers for some of the wards. Work orders were issued on 02.01.2009. However, it was mentioned in the Supply Order that the duration of the contract is up to 31.08.2009. The petitioners state that the duration of contract was reduced from one year to eight {8} months and that the Corporation is getting the works executed without inviting tenders and without awarding contracts. The petitioners now seek appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation. It is no doubt true that in the tender notice dated 08.12.2008, it was mentioned that the works would be awarded for a period of one year. However, the Supply Orders were issued only for a period of eight {8} months. The petitioners did not raise any objection when the orders were received or at least when the period was about to expire. Therefore, this Court cannot issue any directions in this regard. Another grievance of the petitioners is that the Corporation did not take any steps to invite fresh tenders, after the contracts awarded in favour of various agencies have expired. The petitioners claim to have made a representation to the second respondent on 23.10.2009. This Court cannot express any view about the desirability or otherwise of inviting tenders or that matter, the execution of the work through a particular mode. Ultimately, it is for the second respondent to take the decision in this regard. The representation made by the petitioners cannot be kept pending indefinitely. The petitioners will become handicapped unless they know the stand of the second respondent. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to pass written orders in response to the representation said to have been made by the petitioners on 23.10.2009, within a period of three {3} weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners shall enclose a copy of the representation to the copy of this order and submit the same to the second respondent. No costs. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 2nd November 2009 Note: CC by three days B/O RRB