SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 843

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. MANIKUMAR, V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, JJ.
M. Selvam – Appellant
Versus
The Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation & Another – Respondents
W.A.No.1120 of 2016
Decided On : 05-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :S. Rajesh, Advocate
For the Respondents:S. Saravanan, G. Asokapathy for Pass Associates, Advocates

Headnote:

Coimbatore Corporation Act, 1981 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Tender Process – Challenge in this writ appeal is to the order of the writ court made in W.P., by which, the writ court, dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein, stating that the appellant has failed to substantiate the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and further observed that the first respondent had conducted the tender in accordance with the rules and regulations as contemplated under law and that there is no irregularity in the tender process – Held, Though the appellant has alleged unfairness, violation of principles of natural justice, hidden and hurried action, lack of transparency and other irregularities, material on record considered and extracted from the Register and files, do not indicate that the appellant has substantiated the same. – When the auction notice is, contention of the appellant, that he had taken a demand draft itself, does not stand the, test of logic, but there is every possibility of retaining the demand draft, for the auction rescheduled. – Writ Appeal Dismissed

JUDGMENT :

1. Challenge in this writ appeal is to the order of the writ court dated 29.07.2016 made in W.P. No.10554 of 2015, by which, the writ court, dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein, stating that the appellant has failed to substantiate the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and further observed that the first respondent had conducted the tender in accordance with the rules and regulations as contemplated under law and that there is no irregularity in the tender process.

2. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ appeal are that on 10.03.2015, the 1st respondent called for a tender, for collection of fees for Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market for the period 2015 - 2018, vide notification published in News Daily. It is the case of the appellant/petitioner that with intent to participate in the said auction, he took a Demand Draft dated 27.01.2015 for a sum of Rs.5,75,000/- and approached the Commissioner, Coimbatore Municipal Corporation/1st respondent herein, for registration of his name. The Assistant Commissioner, West Zone of Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation, who was in-charge of receiving the deposit amount from the intending auctioneers/tenderers, for participating in the auction, has stated that auction for Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market and D.B.Road parking space have been kept in abeyance, and the 1st respondent has not chosen to receive the amount and register the appellant's name to participate in the tender for Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market. The appellant/petitioner received a message stating that the 1st respondent had received the deposit amount from three persons including the 2nd respondent herein, at 8.00 p.m. on 12.03.2015. On the next day, the appellant submitted a petition along with other tenderers to the Mayor and the Commissioner of Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation and that the Officials assured them that a fresh notification would be issued inviting tenders and the amount if any collected by the respondent officials, would not be entertained and no auction would be held on 13.03.2015 with regard to the granting of licence for Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market.

3. According to the appellant, a fresh notification inviting tenders for D.B. Road Car parking fee collection was published in 'Malai Malar' Tamil daily on 27.03.2015 and another publication in 'Daily Thanthi' on 28.03.2015. However, no fresh tender was called for in respect of Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market fee collection. Thereafter, the appellant came to understand that licence for collection of fee for the Vegetable market was awarded to a member of the Sangam, for a value of Rs.51,03,000/-.

4. According to the appellant, the entire process of accepting the tender, has been done in a suspicious manner, denying and depriving the rights of those, who wanted to participate in the tender. Further, according to the appellant, the tender process was not transparent, hurriedly done, and in violation of the rules mandated under the Coimbatore Corporation Act, 1981.

5. Before the writ court, Coimbatore Corporation/the first respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that in respect of Mettupalayam Road Anna Daily Vegetable Market, on 12.03.2015, one G.A.Wahab had paid the fees, and obtained three online computer receipts at 3.18 p.m., 3.19 p.m. and 3.20 p.m. respectively, one S.Shanmugaraj got three online computer receipts at 3.21 p.m. and 3.22 p.m. respectively and that Mr.Kaliappan the 2nd respondent, got three online computer receipts, at 3.42 p.m., 3.43 p.m. and 3.44 p.m. respectively, for grant of licence for collection of fees, for Anna Vegetable Market. Besides the above three persons, totally 19 members have registered their names to participate in the auction for some other items, which includes toilets and other markets. The 1st respondent has stated that on 12.03.2015, the appellant was not p























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top