When a respondent authority confirms in court that a petitioner's bid is accepted and currently under consideration during the scrutiny stage, a writ petition seeking a direction to consider said bid becomes infructuous.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring action of the 2nd respondent in not entertaining and considering the bid of the petitioner pursuant to the E-Procurement Notice No. NIT-21 APSWRE/2766307/2 026 dated 20.07.2026 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, colourable exercise of power, discrimination, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 Constitution of India, and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to receive and consider the bid of the petitioner along with other

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the 2nd respondent to entertain and consider the bid of the petitioner pursuant to the E-Procurement Notice No. NIT-21 APSWRE/2766307/2026 dated 20.07.2026, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

The Court made the following Order:-

The present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent authority to entertain and consider the bid of the petitioner pursuant to the e-procurement notice dated 27.07.2026.

2. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent had issued a tender for supply and delivery of peanut and millet chikki, in the ratio of 50% each, made with jaggery, to 189 Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Gurukulam schools throughout the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is submitted that the petitioner was the only bidder to participate in the pre-bid meeting.

3. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has now introduced millet as one of the components for the chikki, in addition to peanut. It is further submitted that the petitioner had supplied chikki made of peanut and jaggery during the previous year's tender for other schools under the Mid-Day Meal Scheme. It is submitted that the additional component of millet might come in the way of the petitioner's bid. It is further submitted that the petitioner is competent to supply the required quantity.

4. Though no correspondence or proceedings are placed before this Court which would show that the petitioner is disentitled from participating in the tender or that the bid of the petitioner is not being considered by the respondents. It is anticipated that the respondents have not issued any corrigendum in pursuance of the request of the petitioner dated 27.07.2026, whereby the petitioner sought consideration of the petitioner's bid by taking into account the experience of the petitioner. Anticipating exclusion of the petitioner, writ petition is filed.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner has participated in the bid and that there is no correspondence which has disentitled the petitioner from participating in the bid. Insofar as the awarding of the tender is concerned, it is still in the preliminary stages and the tender is presently at the scrutiny stage.

6. Considering the submission that the petitioner's bid is accepted and is being considered along with the other bids, no further orders are required in the writ petition.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.