Kalikut Fakruddin vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

PENJURI VENUGOPAL (SC FOR JNTUA) 2.PENJURI VENUGOPAL (SC FOR JNTUA)

The petitioner herein is the president of Mayuri Agricultural Industrial and Commercial Exhibition Society registered under A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001 vide registration No.761/2002. While so, the 2"*^ respondent by news paper notification dated 12.10.2022 has issued tender notice inviting for lease of college canteen at the 1®' respondent college for two years. In pursuance of the same, the petitioner has participated in the bid and has offered value of Rs.5,26,500/-. Along with the petitioner, 6 others have participated in the bid on 27.10.2022, among whom the petitioner stood at 3^'^ highest bidder. After completion of the bidding process, the respondent has informed all the bidders that the results would be announced on a later date and the same would be intimated. While the matter being so, the 2"^^ respondent has again issued a fresh tender notification dated 05.11.2022 calling for tenders on 18.11.2022 without even finalizing/cancelling the earlier bid conducted on 27.10.2022. 4 ' The grievance of the petitioner is that other than the condition that the applicant should be a registered firm and should possess FSSAI certificate and GST Registration Certificate, no other conditions were incorporated in the tender notice dated 05.11.2022, which could also be incorporated once the bid is finalized and there is no necessity to have a certificate before allotting the canteen tender. Though the petitioner made a representation dated 11.11.2022 to the 2"^^ respondent for issuance of experience certificate, the same is not issued till date. As there is no valid reason or justification from the respondents for issuing a fresh tender without cancelling/finalizing the earlier bid, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 17.11.2022, this Court has passed the following interim order: 3. 4. “...Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case and aiso considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there shall be interim direction to the respondents not to finalize the Tender notice, dated 05.11.2022, until further orders. ” The respondent No.2 has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations raised by the petitioner and while admitting the fact that the petitioner stood as the third highest bidder, has stated that the first two highest bidders are none other than the benamies of the petitioner itself, which has also been admitted by the petitioner. As the Tender Committee was not satisfied with the specification and standards of the tenders quoted by the bidders on 27.10.2022, the same was cancelled and was exhibited in the notice board; thereafter following due procedure a fresh tender notification dated 05.11.2022 was called for. It is further stated that 5. 5 as the respondents have displayed the entire material in the website and affixed the same in the notice board, the allegation raised by the petitioner that he is not having any knowledge with regard to cancellation of earlier bid dated 27.10.2022 cannot be accepted. Hence prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. P. Venugopal, learned Standing Counsel for JNTU. On a perusal of the material available on record, it can be understood that the main grievance of the petitioner is that he was not aware of the cancellation of the earlier tender notification 7. dated 12.10.2022, but, however, as can be seen from the counter affidavit, it is clear that the bidders who came forward in pursuance of the tender notification dated 12.10.2022 did not I \ \ possess required qualification and were not having the prescribed standards. As such, the 3'”'^ respondent has cancelled the said tender notification dated 12.10.2022 for smooth maintenance of the canteen and for the welfare of the students. Thereafter, the cancellation orders were also affixed in the notice board and it also remains that the entire process of cancellation took place in the presence of the petitioner by following the due process of law. After cancelling the earlier tender notification, the respondents have issued a fresh tender notification on 05.11.2022. 8. However, in pursuance of the fresh tender notification dated 05.11.2022, the petitioner was at liberty to participate in the said tender, but, instead of participating in the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition and obtained an interim order, wherein the respondents were directed not to finalize the tender notice dated 05.11.2022. By misunderstanding the said interim

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed, with a liberty to the respondents for issuing a fresh tender notice, their requirement. There shall be no order as to costs. as per Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending shall also stand closed. if any S.SRINIVASA PRASAD assistant registrar //// 5^ IsECTION OFFICER To,