The petitioners in all these petitions, have challenged the notification dated 17.11.2008 and 3.1.2009 issued by the Bangalore Development Authority inviting tenders only through Electronic Tendering system.

2. The petitioners are all contractors who have obtained valid license from the competent authority to carry out the contract work. Bangalore Development Authority floated a Notification on 17.11.2008 and 3.1.2009 for electrical works to be carried out in the layout formed by them within the jurisdiction of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike inviting tenders only through Electronic Tendering System. The petitioners who intended to participate in the said tender process, are challenging the entire electronic tendering system adopted by the Bangalore Development Authority as one without the authority of law. They have also urged several other grounds for seeking quashing of the impugned notifications.

3. After service of notice, the Bangalore Development Authority has filed a detailed statement of objections traversing all the allegations made in the writ petition. They contend that the State Government by its order dated 30.8.2008 directed the Bangalore Development Authority to take the development work within Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike limits at its own resource. In pursuance of the same, Bangalore Development Authority issued tender notification inviting tender application through Electronic Tender System from the eligible class – I electrical contractors for the tender works. The tender notification dated 3.1.2009 has been issued and published in the notice board and has also been uploaded on the website on 3.1.2009 itself. It has also been published in the daily news paper on 10.1.2009. The State Government has taken up various e-Governance initiatives for computerising citizen centric services for delivering hassle free service to citizens in the most efficient manner. One major e-Governance initiative is “e-Procurement”. The objective of this initiative is to introduce best practices in procurement across Government departments and Public Sector Undertakings. Karnataka is the only State to have introduced a comprehensive Act on the issues related to procurement. The State Government has stopped all manual tendering processes in such department as and when e-procurement platform is introduced. Therefore, they counted that the e-procurement adopted by the Bangalore Development Authority is strictly in accordance with law and cannot be found fault with. They have also traversed all the allegations made by the petitioners on merits and contend that there is no substance in any of them and therefore, they have sought for dismissal of the writ petitions.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contend that after the coming into operation of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 1999 (For short hereinafter referred to as “The Act”), no procurement entity shall procure goods or services except by inviting tenders for supply and no tender shall be invited, processed or accepted by a procurement entity except in accordance with the procedures laid down in the Act and the Rules made thereunder. Though, by an amendment of the Act, Chapter II-A has been inserted providing for E-Procurement, in the absence of Government issuing a notification specifying a procurement entity in respect of class of procurement which can procure goods and services through e-procurement, the Bangalore Development Authority cannot resort to e-procurement and therefore, the procedure adopted is without the authority of law and all the proceedings in pursuance of the same, are liable to be quashed.

5. Per contra, Sri. Nanjunda Reddy, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the Bangalore Development Authority submitted that as the State Government has not issued any notification stipulating the single unified e-procurement platform and no Rules have been yet framed for e-procurement, there is no prohibition for Banga