BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. SUNDAR, J.
M. Mohamed Hakkim - Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent Engineer, (Highways) Construction & Maintenance, Tirunelveli - Respondent
Case No : W.P.(MD)Nos. 925 to 928 of 2022 & W.M.P(MD) Nos. 755, 763, 765, 769, 764, 756, 766, 770 of 2022
Decided On : 27-01-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 - Section 2(c), 11, 11(1), 11(4) - Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus - Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus by calling for entire records pertaining to impugned tender notice issued by respondent vide Tender Notice, in non-plan 2021-22 insofar as Work No.IV referred to in the said notice is concerned and quash the same and consequently direct respondent to proceed with tender process on basis of Tender summary report prepared in pursuance to tender notice by awarding said work in favour of petitioner – Held, It is made clear that besides not expressing any opinion on merits of appeal before Appellate Authority, this Court also makes it clear that no opinion or view has been expressed regarding rights of writ petitioner and similarly placed persons to challenge tender notices as it is not necessary for disposal of captioned matter owing to the stand taken by counsel for writ petitioner - In other words, this order will not serve as a precedent qua challenge to tender notices - To be noted, as far as participating in present tender notices by submitting/uploading EMD/tender documents is a consent qua the writ petitioner as the writ petitioner by his own volition has limited his prayer to rescheduling tender opening date - Therefore, this is a consent order insofar as writ petitioner is concerned - Court also directs lone respondent to upload the rescheduled date forthwith - Court notices that the Appellate Authority qua Section 11 of Tender Transparency Act is 'Government' and 'Government' is defined in Section 2(c) of Tender Transparency Act - Definition says Government is State Government - As Appellate Authority is not a respondent here, State counsel shall communicate this order forthwith to Appellate Authority i.e., Government vide Section 2(c) of Tender Transparency Act - Writ petitions are disposed of.
JUDGMENT/ORDER :
Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus by calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned tender notice issued by the respondent vide Tender Notice No.19/2021-22/HDO, dated 03.01.2022 in non-plan 2021-22 insofar as the Work No.IV referred to in the said notice is concerned and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to proceed with tender process on the basis of the Tender summary report prepared in pursuance to the tender notice No. 7/2021-22/HDO, dated 26.11.2021 by awarding the said work in favour of the petitioner.
1. This common order will govern the captioned four main writ petitions and the captioned writ miscellaneous petitions (W.M.Ps) thereat.
2. Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner and Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader, who has accepted notice for the lone respondent are before this virtual Court.
3. Owing to the short point on which the captioned matters turn, main writ petitions were taken up and heard out with the consent of both sides.
4. Short facts are that the respondent invited bids under 'Single Cover System' through online for four different works which are in the nature of repairs to District roads; that these four tender notices were dated 26.11.2021, 29.11.2021 (two) and 30.11.2021; that these 'four tender notices' shall be referred to as 'first tender notices'; that writ petitioner responded (bid) qua the first tender notice but stood rejected; that writ petitioner assailed such rejection which is by way of a corrigendum to 03.01.2022 tender notices' ('present tender notices' for convenience and clarity); that such challenge was by way of four writ petitions namely, W.P(MD) Nos.599, 600 to 602 of 2022 all of which came to be dismissed by a common order made by another Hon'ble Single Judge on 19.01.2022 albeit preserving the rights of the writ petitioner to file an appeal under Section 11 of 'the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 (Tamil Nadu Act 43 of 1998)' (hereinafter 'Tender Transparency Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity); that writ petitioner accepted this common order dated 19.01.2022 and filed an appeal under Section 11 of Tender Transparency Act before the Government; that the four appeals were filed on 21.01.2022 and the same were received by the Appellate Authority on 22.01.2022; that writ petitioner has sought for an interim order vide Subsection (4) of Section 11 of Tender Transparency Act before the Appellate Authority and that is also pending; that obviously the four main statutory appeals are also pending with Appellate Authority (Government); that the appeals have to be decided within fifteen days vide Subsection (1) of Section 11 of Tender Transparency Act and the fifteen days will elapse on 06.02.2022; that in the interregnum, present tender notices were issued by the lone respondent fixing 28.01.2022/14:00 hours as the last date for uploading the EMD/tender documents and also fixing 31.01.2022/15:30 hours as the time for opening the tender documents in the Office of the lone respondent; that under such circumstances, writ petitioner came up with captioned writ petitions saying the pending four appeals will be neutralized and the appeal remedy under Tender Transparency Act itself will become illusory if the present tender notices are carried to its logical end by opening the same on 31.01.2022.
5. Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner verily believes that he has a good case in the four appeals before the Appellate Authority under Tender Transparency Act. Saying so, learned counsel for writ petitioner on instructions, submitted that it will serve the purpose if the date for opening the tender covers alone is shifted from 31.01.2022 by a week as by then his appeals would be decided by the Appellate Authority.
6. Before this Court proceeds further, it is necessary to extract
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.