IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 2976 of 2005 Between: M/s. S.M. Electrical Works, Rep. by its Proprietor, S.S. Mohiuddin Qadri S/o. S.S.A. Samad Qadri (Late), aged about 41 yrs, H.No. 10-1-12/1, Opp. Saleem Function Hall, A.C. Guards, Masabtank, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Additional Commissioner (Projects), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. 3 The CHief Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. 4 The Executive Engineer (Electrical), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to examine and pass orders on the representations submitted by the petitioner by concluding the agreements for finalization of pending payments with regard to maintenance of Conventional Street Lights under the Package No,10 including for repair work during Survey Work with interest, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.GOPAL RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.RAMA RAO GHANTA The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the respondent corporation in concluding the agreement in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the work order issued in his favour for package No.10 of Maintenance of Conventional Street Lights, including repairs undertaken during the surveying work and thereby not making the payments against pending bills. As can be seen from the material on record, the petitioner made a representation dated 03-02-2005, requesting the respondent corporation to make payment of at least 75% as against the submitted bills. This writ petition is filed alleging that the respondent has failed to consider the said request and merely kept the representation pending. Since the representation is pending, I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the entitlement of the petitioner for payment of the amount so claimed. Instead, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent corporation to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 03-02-2005 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 21-02-2005 LSK ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Addl., Commissioner ( Projects), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyd. 3 The Chief Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Hyd, Hyd. 4 The Executive Engineer, ( Electrical), MUnicipal Corporation of HYd, Hyderabad. 5 Two C.D. copies.