IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 9202 of 2009 Between: 1 Sri Abhyudaya Sanitary Workers Society, Rep by President Chinna Rao, S/o. Kotaiah, R/o. Sambalagaruvu, Guntur. 2 Veera Hanuman Maheela Podupu Sangham, rep by Narayanamma, W/o. Mastanaiah, R/o. Sambalagaruvu, Guntur. 3 M. Guru Krishna Vara Prasad, S/o. Venkaiah, R/o. H.No. 12-5-1, Prakashnagar, Narsaraopet, Guntur District. 4 M. Venkaiah, S/o. Kotaiah, R/o. Sambalagaruvu, Guntur. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Municipal Corporation of Guntur, rep by its Commissioner, Guntur, Guntur District. 2 The Municipal Health Officer, Municipal Corporation of Guntur, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the bill amount along with interest at the rate of 24 % per annum from the date of completion of work as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 04-4-2009. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.U.RAMANJANEYULU Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.VENKATARATNAM The Court made the following : O R D E R:- Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are societies, and petitioner Nos.3 and 4 are registered contractors. While so, the 1st petitioner, in pursuance of the orders of the respondents, supplied seventeen workers, while the 2nd petitioner supplied five Auto Drivers, the 3rd and 4th petitioners supplied Tractor and six workers to various divisions of the respondents- Corporation, and the 2nd respondent, though prepared bills has not made any payment. Then, the petitioners made a representation dated 04.04.2009 to the respondents requesting them to pay the bills sanctioned to them, but it is their grievance that the respondents though paid all the bills amounts to the other contractors, have not paid the bill amounts to them. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation of Guntur appearing for the respondents. Since the representation dated 04.04.2009, said to have been made by the petitioners is pending consideration before the respondents, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: “The respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 04.04.2009, said to have been made by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, expeditiously.” Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 30th April, 2009 bcj