SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 56310

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
M/s. G.P.Medical Stores NIMS – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 34690/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA HYDERABAD * * * *

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.34690 OF 2024 BETWEEN M/s.G.P.Medical Stores NIMS and another … Petitioners v.

Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

… Respondents ORDER PRONOUNCED ON: 16.04.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Order? : (Yes/No)

2. Whether the copies of Order may be marked to Law Reports/Journals? : (Yes/No)

3. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Order? : (Yes/No)

_______________________________ JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL * THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL + WRIT PETITION No.34690 OF 2024 % Dated 16-04-2025 # Between M/s.G.P.Medical Stores NIMS and another.

… Petitioners v.

Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

… Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioners: Sri Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao ^ AGP for Respondent No.1 : Ms.Swapna Madhuri Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2 : Sri G.Arun Kumar Standing Counsel for Respondent No.3 : Sri Koya Prabhakar Reddy

> HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred

1. (1976) AIR 2243

2. AIR ONLINE 2006 SC 645 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.34690 OF 2024

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“….to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned notice dated 07-12-2024 to vacate the premises by 10-12-2024 issued by respondent No.3 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, besides violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent to grant time till 25-12-2024 to clear out the stocks and to handover the physical possession by 26-12-2024 by further directing the respondents No.2 & 3 to refund EMD amount and the advance lease rentals paid by the petitioners and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.…”

2. Heard Mr.Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao, learned counsel representing petitioners, Ms.Swapna Madhuri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Medical and Health Department representing respondent No.1 and Mr.Koya Prabhakar Reddy, learned standing counsel for Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences representing respondent No.3. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel representing petitioners submits that during the course of proceedings, this Court passed an interim order dated 10.12.2024, which reads as follows:

Notice before admission.

Learned Government Pleader for Medical, Health and Family Welfare takes notice on behalf of respondent No.1. Learned Standing Counsel for Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences takes notice on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 and seeks time to get instructions.

There shall be interim direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to grant time till 25.12.2024 to clear out the stocks and hand over the physical possession till 26-12-2024, subject to payment of rent by 19-12-2024 as per the new Rules/new Agreement, if any.

List on 27-12-2024.

and in compliance with the interim order, the petitioners have vacated the premises.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners are successful bidders pursuant to the Tender Notice No.Rc.No:Plng-1/84/2019/MS May, 2020, Tender for Pharmacy Shop Nos.1 & 4 for running pharmacy at NIMS and thereupon continuously running pharmacy to the satisfaction of respondent No.2, for conducting business until a notice has been given to them to vacate and comply with the interim order passed by this Court.

5. In the meanwhile, though the petitioners have vacated the scheduled shops, the EMD which was supposed to be returned to them after completion of the agreed period, the petitioners were not paid advance amount, which was deposited to respondent No.2 and further sub

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top