M/S Nandi Profiles Pvt Ltd, Rep.By Its Executive Director v. Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.30649 OF 2011 DATED:01-06-2015 Between:

M/s. Nandi Profiles Pvt. Ltd., Proddatur YSR Kadapa District Rep. by its Executive Director Mr. R. Govardhan Reddy ... Petitioner And Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., 6th Floor, Parisrama Bhavan Hyderabad Rep. by its Managing Director, and another ... Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Mr. G. Venkat Reddy, for Mr. K. Rathangapani Reddy COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS: Mr. P. Roy Reddy, Standing Counsel

for the A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd.

... Respondents The Court made the following:

ORDER:

At the interlocutory stage, this writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: "to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the 2nd respondent cancelling the lease of the petitioner unilaterally through the proceedings in Lr. No.ZO/APIIC/KDP/APIP/PDTR/Admn. Bldg/2008/1749, dated 3.11.2011 and the rejection of the application seeking allotment through Lr.

No.ZO/APIC/KDP/PDTR-APIE/2011/7439, dt.28.6.2011, as being illegal, arbitrary and is against to the circular instructions of the 1st respondent and consequently set aside the same, and direct the respondents not to take any coercive measures during the subsistence of the lease granted to the petitioner or in the alternative to consider the application of the petitioner seeking allotment submitted on 8.6.2011 afresh in the light of the instructions of the 1st respondent."

At the hearing, Mr. G. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. K. Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as his client has surrendered the land to the respondents, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

In view of the above submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, the interim order dt.21.11.2011 shall stand vacated, and W.V.M.P. No.489 of 2012 and W.P.M.P. No.37996 of 2011 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_______________________ (C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 01-06-2015 bnr