IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 20958 of 2005 Between: J. Anand Reddy, S/o. Kista Reddy, R/o. 322/2, Srinivasa Colony, Mahabubnagar. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, Kidwaipet, Mahabubnagar. 2 Sri P. Ramesh, S/o. Narayana Rao, R/o. Plot No.28, Banjara Green Avenue, B-Hills, Road No.72, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 3 Chief Engineer, Panchayat Raj Dept., Hyderabad. 4 Tender Evaluation Committee, Office of the Panchayat Raj Dept., Office of Panchayat Raj Dept., Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. N.RANGA REDDY FOR MR.K.RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. Counsel for Respondent No.2: MR. U.RAMANJANEYULU The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the finalisation of tender in favour of the 2nd respondent pursuant to tender notice No.To/15/2004-05 dt.4.6.04 in respect of package No.AP-2-1208-Ph-III comprising of three works viz., laying of BY road from NH 7 to Thimmayapalli, NH 7 to Kanwanoor and R/F Kodukuntla to Mentapalli as per the decision of the 4th respondent dt. 7.7.05 as being illegal, arbitrary violative of Art. 14 of the Constituiton of India and also contrary to the judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court and consequently set aside the same by further directing the 4th respondent to evaluate the petitioner’s tender also along with that of the 2nd respondent and award the work to the successful tenderer.” Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri K.Raghuveer Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. In view of the statement of the learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, interim order, dated 28.09.2005 is vacated and WPMP.No.26799 of 2005 is dismissed. C.V.NARAGJUNA REDDY, J 19th June, 2008. kvni