ORDER:

The petitioner had participated in the e-tender dated 14.02.2022 issued by the 4th respondent for operation and maintenance of CPWS Scheme to Medarametla and other habitations of Prakasam District for the financial year 2022-2023. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that his tender had been approved and the petitioner, by letter dated 26.03.2022 was asked to attend the office of the 3rd respondent within one week to submit necessary documents for processing the bid of the petitioner. However, nothing further was done in the matter. Aggrieved by the said inaction, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of W.P.No.11952 of 2022 on 25.04.2022. While the matter was pending, the petitioner received, letter dated 24.04.2022, on 28.04.2022. This letter was a letter of rejection of the bid of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the rejection of the bid of the petitioner and issue of fresh tender notification on 21.04.2022.

The contention of the petitioner is that his bid having been accepted could not have been rejected subsequently. He would further submit that the respondents had not only accepted his bid but had also kept open the said bid by calling upon the petitioner to submit various documents and the deposits for acquiring contract.

Sri G.R. Sudhakar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the said bid of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that it was a single tender and the respondents had deemed it appropriate, in view of the value involved, to call for fresh tenders.

It is settled law that no tenderer has a vested right to be granted the contract on the ground that he was the lowest tenderer or that he was successful in the tender process. In the circumstances, the contention of the petitioner cannot accepted.

Sri T.S. Rayalu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner could not participate in the fresh tender process initiated by e-tender dated 21.04.2022 as any such participation would be treated as waiver of his rights in the present writ petition. He contends that the petitioner would be losing on both counts and would effectively be out of the tender process.

In view of the above submission, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to extend time for the petitioner till tomorrow 5 pm., for filing his tender. In the event of the respondents being unable to accept the tender online, it would be open to the petitioner to file the same physically before the 4th respondent before 5 pm., tomorrow. This course of action is being permitted by this Court solely for the reason that the petitioner should not suffer on account of having approached this Court.

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.