Vizinigiri Suresh Kumar vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court noted the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no cause of action survives in the Writ Petition. Consequently, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous. Any interim order that might have been in place was deemed to have been vacated. No order was made as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in connection with this matter were also closed.

Facts

The petitioner, Vizinigiri Suresh Kumar, participated in a tender-cum-public auction for the maintenance of a chappal stand at the Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Simhachalam. He was the highest bidder in an auction held on November 22, 2023, and had paid 50 percent of the bid amount along with GST. However, respondents 2 (Commissioner of Endowments) and 3 (Executive Officer of the Temple) had not taken further steps to issue the license/lease in his favour. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to issue the lease and also sought an interim direction not to conduct a fresh auction pending the disposal of the writ petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not issuing the lease/license to the petitioner, despite him being the highest bidder and having paid the stipulated amounts, is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the respondents' inaction was illegal and arbitrary, especially since he had fulfilled his obligations by being the highest bidder and making the required payments. He sought a direction to issue the lease. Respondents' Argument: The learned counsel for the respondents stated that no cause of action survives in the Writ Petition.