Yerramaneni Purnachandra Rao vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner's representation dated July 2, 2018, was pending consideration before the Commissioner of Endowments (R.2), and similarly, the proposals sent by R.4 on June 25, 2018, were also pending with the Commissioner. Consequently, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Endowments) to verify the petitioner's representation and take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. Until a decision is made on the petitioner's representation, the decision on the proposals sent by R.4 on June 25, 2018, concerning the shops in question, shall be deferred. No specific finding was made on the alleged irregularity regarding the GST Number, as the matter was remitted for consideration.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the allotment of shops by the respondent-authorities (R.4 institution) in a tender-cum-auction process. The petitioner alleged that the authorities disregarded a condition in the tender notification requiring a GST Number for participation. The petitioner claimed he was prevented from participating in the auction and submitted a representation on July 2, 2018, to the Commissioner of Endowments (R.2) complaining about this irregularity. During the hearing, it was submitted that proposals for the tenders were sent to the Commissioner's office on June 27, 2018, and were pending approval. The petitioner's representation was also pending consideration before the Commissioner.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent-authorities acted irregularly by proceeding with the tender-cum-auction process without insisting on the production of a GST Number, as stipulated in the tender notification, thereby violating the terms of the tender and preventing the petitioner from participating? (Question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation of tender conditions and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contentions: The respondent-authorities completely disregarded a mandatory condition in the tender-cum-auction notification requiring the production of a GST Number. This irregularity prevented the petitioner from participating in the public auction. The petitioner relied on his representation dated July 2, 2018, submitted to the Commissioner of Endowments (R.2). Revenue/State's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. The Standing Counsel for R.4 submitted that proposals for tender approval were sent to the Commissioner's office on June 27, 2018, and were pending.