Back
2012 (3) ALD 166
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
V ESWARAIAH & N. RAVI SHANKAR
P. Srilatha
Versus
A.P. State Warehousing Corporation
Writ Appeal NO.1219 of 2011
Decided on : 06-01-2012
Constitution of India Article 226, 14 – Committee for the purpose of construction - Appellant filed the said writ petition to declare the proceedings bearing cancelling the tender enquiry for in Nellore district as illegal and to consequently direct the respondent to forthwith open the tenders. parties herein are referred as they are arrayed petitioner has also filed another writ petition in to declare the action of the respondent in keeping the tender submitted by the petitioner for construction of god own for Food Corporation of India in abeyance vide proceedings and the learned single Judge of this Court by common order dismissed both the writ petition. However, as against the order dismissing writ petition no appeal is filed and the order passed in the said writ petition has become final case of the writ petitioner is that the Government of India has communicated a scheme of augmentation of storage capacities in state of Andhra Pradesh known as Private Entrepreneur Godowns Scheme and sanctioned 5.56 Lakh Metric Tonnes capacity to Andhra Pradesh to encourage private entrepreneurs to participate in the programme for supporting the food security in two phases i.e., 0.36 Lakhs Metric Tonnes in the first phase and 5.20 Lakhs Metric Tonnes in the second phase. scheme assures a guaranteed reservation for a period of ten years besides providing subsidy from the Central Government and on request, the Government of India earmarked 0.71 Lakhs Metric Tonnes capacity to State Warehousing Corporation and 0.30 Lakhs Metric Tonnes to Central Warehousing Corporation, leaving 4.55 Lakhs Metric Tonnes to private parties –Held pertinent to note that the Central Warehousing Corporation and the State Warehousing Corporations have their own godowns and it is their primary duty to provide godowns for the purpose of proper storage and distribution of food grains to different parts in the country by the Food Corporation of India and since both the corporations are not in a position to cope up with the increased requirement of godowns, a scheme was evaluated where under public private entrepreneurs are given opportunity to construct the godowns and the private entrepreneurs have no right to insist upon the nodal agencies to make use of the godowns provided by them, inasmuch as under the policy decision they have a limited right to construct the godowns to be used by the Food Corporation of India. In the instant case, admittedly, the Agricultural Market Committee has come forward to allot the land, for which the lease is yet to be determined, therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent has discriminated the two tenders among the fourteen tenderers. absence of any concluded contract and any accrued right in favour of the petitioner, it cannot be said that the decision of the respondent corporation is against the public policy or the public interest or that there is violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, warranting interference of this Court. interfere with the order of the learned single Judge and the same is hereby confirmed. There are no merits in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with costs –Appeal is Dismissed.
V. Eswaraiah
This writ appeal is filed in dismissing the W.P. No. 3547 of 2011 of the appellant by order dated 5.11.2011. The appellant filed the said writ petition to declare the proceedings dated 2.2.2011 bearing No. SWC/Conf/1919/PEG-2008/PPP/10-11 cancelling the tender enquiry for Mypadu Road in Nellore district as illegal and to consequently direct the respondent to forthwith open the tenders. The parties herein are referred as they are arrayed in the writ petition.
2. The petitioner has also filed another writ petition in W.P. No. 30748 of 2010 to declare the action of the respondent in keeping the tender submitted by the petitioner for construction of godown for Food Corporation of India in abeyance vide proceedings No. SWC/Conf/1919/PEG-2008/PPP/10-2011(MYR-5) dated 27.11.2010 and the learned single Judge of this Court by common order dated 5.11.2011 dismissed both the writ petition. However, as against the order dismissing writ petition No. 30748 of 2011, no appeal is filed and the order passed in the said writ petition has become final.
3. The case of the writ petitioner is that the Government of India has communicated a scheme of augmentation of storage capacities in state of Andhra Pradesh known as Private Entrepreneur Godowns (PEG) 2008 Scheme and sanctioned 5.56 Lakh Metric Tonnes capacity to Andhra Pradesh to encourage private entrepreneurs to participate in the programme for supporting the food security in two phases i.e., 0.36 Lakhs Metric Tonnes in the first phase and 5.20 Lakhs Metric Tonnes in the second phase. The scheme assures a guaranteed reservation for a period of ten years besides providing subsidy from the Central Government and on request, the Government of India earmarked 0.71 Lakhs Metric Tonnes capacity to State Warehousing Corporation and 0.30 Lakhs Metric Tonnes to Central Warehousing Corporation, leaving 4.55 Lakhs Metric Tonnes to private parties. The A.P. State Warehousing Corporation (for short SWC), being the nodal agency, has taken up the responsibility of flouting and finalisation of tenders under two bids i.e., technical bid and financial bid and issued tender notification on 17.9.2010. The writ petitioner along with 5 others has submitted tenders for construction of FCI godowns at Mypadu road in Nellore District and in terms of the tender conditions has paid the earnest money deposit of Rs.3,00,000/-. The last date for filing the tenders was 12.10.2010 and the technical bid was opened on the same day wherein one tender was rejected and in all five tenders including the petitioner were accepted and the respondent stated to have inspected the respective proposed sites of all the qualified tenderers. The writ petitioner claims that among the said five qualified tenderers, the sites of three tenderers were outside Mypadu village and the site of the other tenderer has no approach road and thus his site is most suitable for construction of FCI godowns inasmuch as it is located on Mypadu main road leading to Nellore town which is a State highway. Since the respondent did not finalise the tender, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 30748 of 2010 and this Court by order dated 24.1.2011 directed the respondent to take a decision as to their course of action in respect of the construction of FCI godown at Mypadu road, Nellore. Thereafter, the respondent issued proceedings, intimating the petitioner that her tender has not been considered for the opening of price bid and her earnest money deposit of Rs.3,00,000/-is being returned to her vide cheque bearing No. 672725 dated 2.2.2011, questioning the said order, the petitioner filed writ petition no.3547 of 2011.
4. It is seen from the material available on record, that the respondent issued proceedings No. SWC/Conf/1919/PEG-2008/PPP/10-11 dated 26.1.2011 indicating the reasons for cancellation of the tenders at Bapatla and Mypadu Road centres, copy of which was marked to the petitioner and the same was even filed along with the writ petiti
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
