IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN and WMP Nos. 6185 & 6187 of 2025 K.Banupriya Thiyagu Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Block Development Officer(BP)

K.V.Kuppam Block, Vellore.

2.M/s.Beemji Enterprises No.25, VTK Nagar, Valliyammal Road, Katpadi, Vellore-

632 007.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.A3/2446/2024 dated 2.1.2025 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction and further direct the 1st respondent conduct fresh tender as per the guidelines issued by the Rural development and Panchayat Raj Department For Petitioner(s): M/s.S.N.Kirubanandam B.Balamurugan N.R.Saigoutham For Respondent(s): M/s.S.J.Mohamed Sathik-GA(R1)

M/s. T.P.Prabakaran,(R2)

O R D E R

The petitioner is the President of Kalampattu Village Panchayat, which is situated in Vellore District. A tender was called by the 1st respondent under the “ekf;F ehnk jpl;lk; 2024-2025”. The purpose of the Tender was for construction of a Health Sub Centre at the said village.

2. The petitioner relies upon an order passed by this Court in W.P. No.

36431 of 2024 and W.P. No. 36948 of 2024 dated 20.01.2025, to plead that the 2nd respondent is ineligible to participate in the Tender, as his Registration Certificate, as well as, Solvency Certificate had not been renewed. In addition, the petitioner pleads that the 2nd respondent is a defaulter at any work that has been tendered to him. She relies upon the proceedings of K.V.Kuppam Panchayat Union to show that the 2nd respondent has never completed his contractual obligations with the local authority.

3. In addition, Mr.S.M.Kirubanandam pleads that the registration of the

2nd respondent as a Class-III contractor is contrary to the guidelines that have been issued by the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department. He further points out that the District Collector had recommended that the 2nd respondent may be proceeded against for not completion of the earlier works. He further adds that the 2nd respondent has no construction experience, and has only laid pavements and done activities, which are connected not with the erection of buildings. Consequently, the submission of Mr.S.N.Kirubanandam is that the award of Tender in favour of the 2nd respondent requires to be set aside.

4. Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik, appearing for the 1st respondent points out that the nature of work being carried on by the 2nd respondent is an essential work. The Tender was called for constructing a Health Sub Centre. Consequent to the administrative sanction issued by the District Collector, Vellore, on 02.12.2024, tender was called on 17.12.2024. Totally, there were three bidders in the Tender called for, and the petitioner quoted a lowest amount of Rs.39,46,857.50. Hence, the work order was issued for him on 02.01.2025. 5. The 1st respondent further states that the 2nd respondent was a registered Class-III Contractor for the period from 12.12.2023 to 12.12.2024 and that the Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj had issued proceedings on 25.09.2024, permitting a 90 days cooling-off period for renewal of contractor registrations.

6. He has further pleaded that though the Solvency Certificate had not been issued by the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent had paid a Tender fee of Rs.83,877/-, and had also furnished an Encumbrance Certificate for a property worth Rs.30,00,000/-. He relies on the guidelines dated 25.09.2024 in order to plead that production of Solvency Certificate for new contractor Registrations do not govern the tendering process or the documents produced therein.

7. He further submits that the work for the Health Sub Center has commenced by constructing the basement and placing re-enforcement charges for erecting the pillars. He states that since the interim order of status quo was granted on 24.02.2025, the construction has not proceeded further. He further pleads that the construction of the Health