← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/32852/2015dismissed

M/S Chaitanya Media Solutions, Rep. By Its Manager v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its

2015-11-19C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy3 pages

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.32852 of 2015 Dated 19.11.2015 Between:

M/s.Chaitanya Media Solutions rep. by its Managaer (Legal) Atchi Ramesh Babu ... Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary Municipal Administration Hyderabad and 3 others .

...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.V.Mallik for Mr.P.V.Sai Krishna Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 4: GP for Municipal Administration (AP) Counsel for respondent No.3: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent No.2: None appeared

The Court made the following:

O r d e r :

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2, in issuing the work order relating to provision of Integrated Centralized IP Based CCTV Cameras and PTZ Cameras using wireless radios for city surveillance, wireless radio technical in and around GMC limits in Guntur City in spite of registered authorised agreement, dated 14-03-2014, entered between the petitioner and respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. At the hearing, Mr.V.Mallik, learned Counsel representing Mr.P.V.Sai Krishna, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that when respondent No.2 has issued a fresh tender notification in respect of the same work, which is covered by agreement, dated 14-03-2014, the petitioner herein has filed WP.No.16498 of 2015 assailing the same and that in WPMP.No.21442 of 2015, this Court has granted an interim order on 13-07-2015 restraining respondent No.2 from proceeding with the said tender notice.

In my opinion, as the subject matter of the dispute has been pending adjudication in WP.No.16498 of 2015, it is appropriate for the petitioner to claim comprehensive reliefs including the one, which is claimed in the present Writ Petition, in the said Writ Petition.

In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed

without adjudicating on the merits of the case and with liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate amendment in the above mentioned Writ Petition.

As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.42408 of 2015, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 19th November, 2015 LUR