IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.5953 of 2009 Between: 1 Komali Kishore Kumar Goud S/o. Venkata Rao R/o. D.No. 72-2-13/5, Near Church Opp. Co-Optex, Lala Cheruvu, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. 2 Kota Panduranga Vittal S/o. Nageswara Rao R/o. D.No. 4-16-10, Alcot Gardens, Rajahmundry East Godavari District. 3 Korupolu Krishna Murthy S/o. Thammayya R/o. D.No. 83-3-6, V.L. Puram Rajahmundry East Godavari District. 4 M/s. M. Ramagopal Rep. by Margani Ramgopal S/o. Venkateswara Rao, D.No. 29-28-8, Lakshmivarapupeta, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of A.P. Rep. by its Secretary Municipal Administration Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 Director, Municipal Administration Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3 Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry Rep. by its Commissioner, Rajahmundry, E.G. District. 4 Vattikuti Janakiramaiah S/o. Late Rajagopal Rajahmundry, E.G. District. 5 Ch. Veerreddy S/o. Not known Class-I Contractor, Ravulapalm , E.G. District. 6 Sri Venkateswara Constructions, Contractors Rajahmundry, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 Certiorari, quashing the E-Procurement Short Tender Notice NIT No. 338 to 354/MCR/L.R.S./2008-2009 dt. 13-2-2009 of the 3rd respondent which is illegal, arbitrary and capricious Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.M.SIVANANDA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 6: MR.A.VISHNUVARDHAN REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: All the petitioners claim to be the contractors working under the Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. They filed this writ petition for quashing E-procurement Short Tender Notice dated 13.02.2009 of the third respondent – Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry inviting tenders from the eligible contractors for 17 numbers of works, the details of which were given in the tender notice. The case of the petitioners is that the third respondent finalized the contracts worth Rs.1,96,01,642/- by dividing them into 17 contracts, though the nature of work is same only with a view to overcome the necessity of referring the appraisal of the contract work to the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation. Only in order to give contract to respondents 4 to 6, a pre condition was incorporated in the bid conditions that a contractor should have experience of laying of B.T road by using the material from Hotmix Plant, thereby, negating the other contractors, who are otherwise entitled to bid. Today when the matter is taken up, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation stated that the works in question have already been executed and bills were also paid, which fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Even though the writ petition was filed in March, 2009, no orders are passed so far. In view of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel that the works in question have already been completed and bills were also paid, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. N.V.RAMANA, J Date: 25.06.2009 va