ORDER : Arup Kumar Goswami, J. On 5.2.2021, this Court passed the following order: “Heard Mr. V. R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL).No.31 of 2021, Mr. S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. M. Jayaram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL).No.32 of 2021 and Mr. G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL).No.33 of 2021. Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appears on behalf of Union of India. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned standing counsel, appears on behalf of the A.P. State Election Commission. Mr. Avinash Desai, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the Election Commission of India. Mr. C.Sumon, learned Government Pleader, appears on behalf of the State Government. By these petitions, essentially, the petitioners are seeking directions to the State Election Commission not to use the e-Watch Mobile Application for the purpose of present Ordinary Elections to the Gram Panchayats. One of the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that necessary Security Audit Certificate is yet to be obtained and, therefore, without such certificate, it will be impermissible for the State Election Commission to use the Application. Mr. C. Sumon, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State Government, submits that on 04.02.2021, the Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission had written a letter to the Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Technology Services, which is stated to be the nodal agency for certifying the Applications/Websites in respect of cyber security, requesting issuance of Security Audit Certificate for hosting the e-Watch 4 HCJ & CPK, J WP (PIL) Nos.31, 32 & 33 of 2021 Application in the Andhra Pradesh State Data Centre server. He has also submitted that the process of certification normally takes about five days at the first instance. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the State Election Commission, states that he is not aware of the said development and wants to take instructions on that aspect as well as on certain other aspects in relation to the assertions made in the petitions. Considering the matter in its entirety, we deem it appropriate to take up these petitions on 09.02.2021 for further consideration. List accordingly. Till then, e-Watch Mobile Application shall not be given effect to by the State Election Commission.” 2. On 9.2.2021, this Court passed the following order : “Heard Mr. Considering the matter in its entirety, we deem it appropriate to take up these petitions on 09.02.2021 for further consideration. List accordingly. Till then, e-Watch Mobile Application shall not be given effect to by the State Election Commission.” 2. On 9.2.2021, this Court passed the following order : “Heard Mr. V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.31 of 2021, Mr. S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. M. Jayaram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.32 of 2021, and Mr. G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.33 of 2021. Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appears on behalf of Union of India. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, appears on behalf of the A.P. State Election Commission. Mr. Avinash Desai, learned Counsel, appears on behalf of the Election Commission of India. Mr. C. Sumon, learned Government Pleader appears on behalf of the State Government. A memo is placed by Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, enclosing a document, dated 12.01.2021, submied by one Ennikala Nigha to the State Election Commissioner. It is stated therein that, though, they are trying to use ‘NIGHA’ application of the State of Andhra Pradesh, they found that the said application is not working. Mr. C.Sumon, learned State Counsel, submits that this aspect was never brought to the notice of the State Government. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar further submits that State Election Commissioner would also explore the possibility of using ‘NIGHA’ application as well as ‘c VIGIL’ App of the Election Commission of India. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that they with have no objection if ‘NIGHA’/c VIGIL’ App is utilized by the State Election Commission. Mr. C. Sumon also submits that, certainly, State Government with have no objection if ‘NIGHA’/’c VIGIL’ App is utilized for the purpose of election by the State Election Commission. With regard to ‘e-Watch’ Mobile Application, it is submitted by Mr. C. Sumon that Andhra Pradesh Technology Services have issued a communication today to the State Election Commission raising certain issues and is awaiting response from the State Election Commission. He has submitted, amongst others, that the Source Code of Social Welfare Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh was used for ‘e-Watch’ Mobile Application. However, there is no material on record to indicate that State Election Commission obtained any prior permission from the Social Welfare Department. He has submitted, amongst others, that the Source Code of Social Welfare Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh was used for ‘e-Watch’ Mobile Application. However, there is no material on record to indicate that State Election Commission obtained any prior permission from the Social Welfare Department. He has submitted that once response is received from the State Election Commission on the issues raised in the leer issued today, further steps will be taken by the Andhra Pradesh Technology Services. Having regard to the above, we consider it appropriate to list these cases on 17.02.2021 to take note of further developments. The interim order passed earlier shall continue till 17.02.2021.” 3. On 17.2.2021, this Court passed the following order : “Heard Mr. V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P. (PIL) No.31 of 2021. On the last occasion, in W.P. (PIL) No.32 of 2021, Mr. S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. M. Jayaram Reddy, appeared. However, Mr. M. Jayaram Reddy, learned counsel, suddenly breathed his last in the intervening night of 15th& 16thFebruary, 2021.Today, Mr. S. Sharath Kumar is also not present. Heard Mr. G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P. (PIL) No.33 of 2021. Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appears on behalf of the 1strespondent. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, appears on behalf of the 3rdrespondent-State Election Commission. Mr. Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 5threspondent, submits that, responding to the queries made by the Andhra Pradesh Technology Services, the State Election Commission had submitted its response on 15.02.2021 and this position is not disputed by Mr. N. Aswhani Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State Election Commission. It is submitted that process of verification and analysis will take some time. In that view of the matter, Registry will list these cases on 25.02.2021, as agreed upon by the learned counsel for the parties. Interim order passed earlier shall continue.” 4. On 26.2.2021, this Court passed the following order : “Perused the order, dated 17.02.2021. Heard Mr. V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.31 of 2021, and Sri G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.33 of 2021. Mr. D. Vamsi Krishna, learned counsel, appears on behalf of Sri N. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3/State Election Commission. Heard Mr. V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.31 of 2021, and Sri G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.33 of 2021. Mr. D. Vamsi Krishna, learned counsel, appears on behalf of Sri N. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3/State Election Commission. It is submitted by Sri C. Sumon, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the State Government, that on 19.02.2021, the Andhra Pradesh Technology Services considered the various security aspects of the application in question and out of the 24 queries raised, only 6 had been addressed by the State Election Commission and this aspect was brought to the notice of the State Election Commission on 19.02.2021 itself. It is submitted by him that till now, with regard to the deficiencies/shortcomings in the balance 18 aspects, no further response has come from the State Election Commission. It is also contended by him that only after response is received with regard to the pending queries, further steps can be taken by the A.P. Technology Services. Having regard to the above submissions, we deem it appropriate to direct the Registry to list the se cases on 05.03.2021. Interim order issued shall continue until further orders.” 5. Heard Mr. V.R. Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.31 of 2021 and Mr. G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.33 of 2021. Also heard Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for Union of India, Mr. Ashwani Kumar, learned standing counsel appearing for the A.P. State Election Commission, Mr. Avinash Desai, learned counsel appearing for Election Commission of India and Mr. C. Sumon, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State Government. 6. Sri S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. Jaya Ram Reddy, who had expired, appeared on couple of occasions. Today, he has not appeared. 7. Mr. C. Sumon, learned Government Pleader, submits that the election Commission has not responded till date to the queries raised and since the process of election of municipalities and municipal corporations is coming to an end on 10.03.2021, these petitions have been practically rendered infructuous having regard to the subject matter in issue. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners also endorsed the above submission. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners also endorsed the above submission. But they contend that Zilla Parishad Territorial Constituency and Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency elections have not been notified as on today and therefore, liberty may be reserved to the petitioners to approach this Court, if occasion so arises. 9. Having regard to the above submissions, these petitions are disposed of as infructuous, reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court, if occasion so arises. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.