Telangana High Court
WP/24386/2004 of Sri Venkateswara Balaji Constructions Nellore, Vs The Superintendent Engineer ( RAND B), on 27 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24386 of 2004 Between: Sri Venkateswara Balaji Constructions Nellore, rep. by its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24386 of 2004
Between:
Sri Venkateswara Balaji Constructions Nellore, rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri D. Subba Rao,S/o. Satyanarayana, R/o. Himasamrajya Residency, Flat No. G3, Ashoknagar Ist Lane, Guntur.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Superintendent Engineer ( R& B), Circle, Guntur.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toIssue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ ofMandamus declaring that the action of the respondent herein in not following theclause 25 (5) (I) of the tender notice No. 8/2004-05 dt. 6.12.2004 of the respondentproperly as bad, arbitrary, illegal, unjust, unreasonable and contrary to tenderconditions and consequently direct the respondent to consider the bids of thecandidates who submitted the certificates by the concerned Executive Engineersonly in concerned with the Clause 25 (5) (I) of the tender notice to all the works andpass such other order or orders.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
For not following the clause 25 (5)(1) of Tender Notice No.8/2004-2005 dated 06-12-2004 by the respondent, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bidders have to submit acertificate from the Executive Engineer concerned with regard to the possession of aHot Mix Plant 40-60 TPG along with quality control lab with him in working conditionwithin a distance of 70 Kms. from the work site. The grievance of the petitioner is thatparticular clause has not been followed and therefore the respondent is trying toconsider tenders of other participants contrary to the tender notification. 3. LearnedGovernment Pleader contended that the respondent will follow the conditions asmentioned in the Tender Notification dated 06.12.2004.
4. Having incorporated certain conditions in the Tender Notification dated06.12.2004 it is bounden duty of the respondent to follow those conditions.06.12.2004 it is bounden duty of the respondent to follow those conditions.
5. Therefore, a direction is given to the respondent to follow the tender conditions asper the Notice No.8/2004-2005 dated 06.12.2004. The writ petition is, accordingly,disposed of. No costs.
Date: 27[th] December 2004.
BSB
____________
K.C.BHANU,J.
// TRUE COPY //
SECTION OFFICER
To
1. The Superintendent Engineer ( R& B), Circle, Guntur.
2. Two CCs to the Government Pleader for R & B, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (OUT).
3. Two CD copies