THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.12082 OF 2006 Dated 18th June, 2010 Between: A.Narayana …Petitioner And The Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh And two others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri A.Jayasankar Reddy Counsel for the respondents: None appeared The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not giving wide publicity to Tender Notice No.350/2006-2007 of DEO/O/NDL/Proc.No.DE/O/NDL/AE/TECH/ D.No.1230/06, dated 05.06.2006, as illegal and arbitrary. A perusal of the record shows that the impugned tender notice was issued as far back as 05.06.2006 for erection of HT/LT line. This Court, by order dated 16.06.2006, granted stay of the evaluation of bids or award of contract. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Divisional Engineer, Operations, APCPDCL, Nandyal, Kurnool District-respondent No.3, it is, inter alia, stated that as the works involving erection of transformers and other related works were urgent in nature and being executed on war footing on account of emergency nature, the local contractors are being awarded with these works to avoid hampering of consumer services and unwarranted accidents. Accordingly, the local contractors are identified and being entrusted with these works. These contractors are allowed to obtain tender schedules from the Office by paying necessary amount in the form of Demand Draft and the tenders submitted by them in sealed covers are being finalised. It is further stated that the petitioner was blacklisted vide proceedings dated 11.08.2004 and therefore, he was not eligible for participating in the tender process. The petitioner filed a reply-affidavit, wherein he pleaded that he was not blacklisted and that only a notice proposing to blacklist him was given, to which he has given a reply and no final order has been passed. In the present case, it is not necessary for this Court to go into the question as to whether the petitioner was entitled to participate in the tender process or not having regard to the stand taken by the respondents in the counter-affidavit that in view of emergency nature of the works, all the local contractors are allowed to participate in the tender process to save time. The petitioner also being a local contractor ought to have approached the respondents for supply of tender schedule. Having considered the averments contained in the counter-affidavit, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 18th June, 2010 vrn