THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.4953 OF 2024

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents in rejecting the tender application of the petitioner dated 24.012020 without any reason and disqualifying tender application submitted by the petitioner, pursuant to tender notice dated 18.12.2019, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and also against the well settled laws of the Hon’ble Apex Court as affirmed in Review (Civil) Nos.721-722 of 2022 in SLP (C) Nos.4894-4895 of 2022 dated

15.02.2023 and also against the principles of natural justice.

2. Though a lengthy affidavit has been filed with extracts of various judgments rendered by the Apex Court as well as that of the privy Council, it is to be noted that the petitioner had approached this Court on earlier occasion by filing Writ Petition, vide W.P. No.1740 of 2020 assailing the action of respondent authorities in rejecting the tender application submitted by the petitioner in response to the tender notice dated 18.12.2019.

3. The said Writ Petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, vide order dated 01.04.2021.

4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the petitioner herein had preferred an Intra Court Appeal invoking Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, vide Writ Appeal No.617 of 2021. A Division bench of this Court by its order dated

29.11.2021 dismissed the said Writ Appeal.

5. The petitioner thereafter had continued its move upwards by challenging the said order in Writ Appeal by filing a Special Leave Petition, vide SLP (C). Nos.4894-4895 of 2022 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The aforesaid SLP was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by its order dated 25.03.2022. The petitioner thereafter filed Review Petition, vide R.P. (C) Nos.721- 722 of 2022 seeking review of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C). Nos.4894-4895 of 2022. The Hon’ble Supreme Court by its order dated 20.07.2022 dismissed the Review Petition. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Curative Petition, vide Curative Petition (Civil) Nos.169-170 of 2022 in Review Petition in SLP and the four-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court by its order dated 15.02.2023 dismissed the Curative Petitions. Thus, the petitioner had availed all the constitutional remedies available to him in law starting from filing of Writ Petition alleging violation of its fundamental rights up until the Curative Petitions were filed.

6. The petitioner herein having failed in all of its previous attempts in the first round of litigation, has preferred the present writ petition once again challenging the same proceedings and seeking the same relief.

7. The junior Counsel appearing on behalf of the learned Counsel for the petitioner in the first session had sought for the matter to be passed over stating that her senior is on legs before another Court. However, when the matter was taken up in the after-noon session, by stating that her senior was out of station she had sought for an adjournment. Since, the reason stated for seeking an adjournment was inconsistent, this Court had declined the grant of adjournment and had called upon the junior counsel to proceed with the matter.

8. Upon hearing the junior counsel for some-time, this Court feels it loath to note that the petitioner and the Counsels appearing for the petitioner seem to be ignorant/ignoring the constitutional mandate enshrined under Article 141 of the Constitution of India and the principle of stare decisis. Therefore, inevitably this Court deems it obligatory to yet again echo one of the vital foundational pillars upholding the structure of our legal system.

9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India (UOI) and Ors. Vs. S.P. Sharma and Ors1, had reiterated that doctrine of res – judicata is fundamental principle which sustains the rule of law. The Court further held, that our legal system will only function when it is accepted that ‘someone’