ORDER

The Superintending Engineer of Building Circle invited tender through e-procurement portal for providing repairs and painting work in old block of Legislators Home, Bengaluru. Petitioner submitted his e-application. Technical bid was opened on 02.11.2020. Petitioner's bid was considered as non-responsive. On 04.11.2020, petitioner submitted an appeal under Section 16 of the KTPP Act1 before the State Government. No notice was issued to the petitioner nor any hearing conducted. Later, he learnt that on 30.11.2020, the State Government have informed the Chief Engineer (second respondent) that the appeal proceedings stood closed. Hence, this writ petition.

2. State Government, as also the fifth respondent in whose favour the Contract has been awarded have filed Statements of objections.

3. Shri. Subramanya, learned Addl. Advocate General submitted that 90% of the work is complete.

Therefore, this petition is rendered infructuous.

4. Learned Advocate for petitioner strongly contended that petitioner has presented the appeal within two days from the date of rejection of Technical bid. Without conducting any hearing, the Under Secretary to the The Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999 Government has conveyed to the Chief Engineer about closure of appeal proceedings. Therefore, respondents have acted illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice.

5. I have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.

6. The Statement of learned Addl. Advocate General and the photographs annexed to the Statement of objections filed by respondent No.5 show that substantial work has taken place.

7. It is not in dispute that petitioner has presented the appeal within two days from the date of rejection of his Technical bid. It is also not in dispute that without issuing notice the appeal proceedings have been closed. Petitioner has not even been intimated about the fate of his appeal. This is unfortunate. Though learned Addl. Advocate General assured this Court that care will be taken to see that such instances do not recur, this Court cannot remain a silent spectator when such fragrant violation of law takes place.

8. In the facts and circumstances of this case, though no relief can be granted to the petitioner with respect to the tender, petitioner shall be entitled for the costs of these proceedings. Further, the Officer presiding over the Appellate Authority ordering closure of appeal proceedings has to be dealt with suitably for serious infraction of law.

9. Hence, the following:

ORDER (a) This petition is disposed of with cost of `25,000/-

payable to petitioner by State Government within three months and to report compliance.

(b) A copy of this order shall be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka for information and necessary action to take appropriate action against the Officer presiding the Appellate Authority. The cost of `25,000/- payable to the petitioner shall also be recovered from the said Officer after following due process of law.

(c) The Chief Secretary shall issue necessary instructions to the concerned to ensure that such fragrant violation of law does not recur.

(d) Compliance of directions (b) and (c) shall be placed on record of this file within three months.

10. In view of disposal of the writ petition, pending interlocutary applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same are disposed of.