IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 14812 of 2002 BETWEEN: Gutha Hajarth Naidu, S/o Venkata Subba Naidu, 2/292-4, Nehru Nagar Sankarapuram, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., Rep. by its Superintending engineer (Operations), Vidyuth Bhavan, Cuddapah. 2 C. Sasi Kumar, 14-395, Sangampeta, Cuddapah District. 3 C. Vasantha Rao, Miduthur, Kojipet Mandal, Cuddapah District. 4 B. Sudhalaxmi, 24/662, Vasanthpet, Proddutur, Cuddapah District. 5 M. Rama Murthy, Lingampalli, Rajampet Dvn., Cuddapah District. 6 K. Srinivasulu Naidu, Senagluru, Rajampet Dvn., Cuddapah 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 writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authority in awarding sub station work contracts to the respondents 2 to 6 in Cuddapah and Rajampet operations division as per the tender notice No.2 in proceeding No. SE/0/CDP/T/SBE-4 D. No. 1221/2002 dated 30.5.2002 as bad and illegal and arbitrary violative of Fundamental Rights Guaranteed under the constitution of India, after holding that the petitioner is entitled for other 3 contracts for which the petitioner is the eligible person. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.V.BHANU PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following: ORDER: The subject matter of the writ petition relates to the awarding of contract for the work of operation and maintenance of 33/11 KV sub-station Brahmanapalli for the period from 01.08.2002 to 31.03.2003. The lease period of the contract itself is over, as such, the subject matter of the writ petition questioning the said tender notification has become infructuous. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 11, 2008 DSK