IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and W.M.P.Nos.45997, 45998 & 45999 of 2025 M/s.Senbagam Construction, Rep.by its Managing Director, K.Kuppusamy, S/o.R.Kuppusamy, No.15, Chinnamuthur, Muthur, Kangayam Taluk, Tiruppur District. .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chief Engineer, Highways Department, HRS Campus, No.76, Sardar Pattel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 025.

2.The Superintending Engineer/Tendering Inviting Authority, Highways Department, Construction Maintenance, No.39, Chikkanna College Road, Kallampalayam, Tirupur-641 602, Tiruppur District.

3.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Construction & Maintenance, Alangiyam Road, Dharapuram-638 656, Tiruppur District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relevant to the impugned order of rejection order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal, improper, unreasonable, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and thereby direct the 2nd respondent to select the petitioner is a lowest bidder which he has coated a sum of Rs.16,94,66,265.00 (Rupees Sixteen Crores Ninety Four Lakhs Sixty Six Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Five only) as tender amount.

For petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for Mr.N.Palanisamy For Respondents : Ms.S.Anitha, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Aggrieved by the rejection order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking quashment of the same with a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to select the petitioner as the lowest bidder with reference to the tender notification issued by the 2nd respondent dated 02.09.2025.

2. Ms.S.Anitha, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

3. Aggrieved by the rejection order passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the tender application of the petitioner dated 09.10.2025 with reference to the tender notification dated 02.09.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent on the ground that the petitioner has failed to enclose the work site inspection certificate and working condition of the plant and machinery certificate, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid relief.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner had been waiting till before the last date for submission of tender application, the 3rd respondent had not chosen either to conduct inspection or to issue the work site inspection certificate as well as the working condition of the plant and machinery certificate to the petitioner despite their repeated requests which clearly shows the dereliction of the statutory duty on the part of the 3rd respondent which cannot be put against the petitioner and therefore, the impugned rejection order is wholly arbitrary and illegal which is liable to be interfered with.

5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents while defending the impugned order submitted that it is the duty of the petitioner to facilitate the inspection so as to enable the authorities to identify the nature and condition of machinery and issue the work site inspection certificates. He further submitted that, even prior to the last date for submission of application, the petitioner had not approached either the authorities or this Court. In the absence of any co-operation on the part of the petitioner with the process of inspection, the claim of the petitioner with regard to non-issuance of requisite certificates is wholly unsustainable. 6. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. Admittedly, the petitioner had submitted his tender application without enclosing the work site inspection certificate and the certificate relating to the