THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.30474 of 2014 Dated : 13.10.2014 Between:
Guatham Human Welfare Society Registered No.106 of 2011, Rep., by its President Sri Durgam Devaji S/o.Bungate, Office at Ambedkar Nagar, Main Road, Bus Stand, Sirpur-T Village and Mandal, Adilabad District.
.. Petitioner And The Government of Telangana, Rep., by the Commissioner Vydya Vidhana Parishad, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad & 6 others .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.30474 of 2014 ORDER :
The petitioner is a registered society providing sanitation services in the Community Hospital Sirpur (T) under “Third Party Hiring” contract, which was awarded to the petitioner on 28.04.2011 and is extended from time to time. The last extension was granted on 22.05.2014 which expired on 30.06.2014 and even now the petitioner is continuing to provide services. While things stood thus, the 3rd respondent called for fresh tenders for providing sanitation services in the respondent hospital. The petitioner also participated in the tender process. On 26.09.2014 a circular was issued by the Civil Assistant Surgeon, T.V.V.P Community Health Centre, Sirpur (T) Adilabad District, informing the public that the tenders were opened on 26.09.2014 and final decision of awarding of contract will be taken up on 08.10.2014. The enclosed sheet would disclose the successful bidders and the quotation offered by them. So far no final decision is taken. The petitioner’s quotation price is Rs.45,000/- per month.
2. The petitioner further contends that even though he has quoted Rs.45,000/- and there are others who have quoted less than the offer given by the petitioner and the offer given by the 7th respondent is higher than the offer given by the petitioner, none of the tenderers have requisite eligibility including the 7th respondent whereas the respondents are taking steps to award contract to the 7th respondent even though the bid is higher than the bid offered by the petitioner.
3. As evident from the pleadings, the decision to award contract is not taken so far. The circular which is impugned in the writ petition only indicate the list of persons whose bids were accepted and a decision would be taken. It is not a decision in awarding contract to any person including the 7th respondent. Unless a decision is taken by the competent authority awarding contract, the issue of whether the person who is selected for awarding contract has satisfied the parameters or not and whether there is justification to award contract cannot be gone into. Furthermore, the parameters of interference of the Court in exercise of power of judicial review under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pertaining to matters of this nature is limited. Thus, those issues can be gone into only when a decision is taken.
4. Thus, in the facts of this case, this writ petition is premature and is accordingly dismissed. It is open to the respondents to take decision in pursuant to the circular dated 26.09.2014. It is always open to the petitioner to ventilate his grievance in appropriate proceedings if any decision is taken by the respondents, which according to him, is not in accordance with parameters of selection process, that a person who does not deserve to be selected is selected is arbitrary and on any other grounds. There shall be no order as to costs.
5. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand dismissed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 13th October, 2014 Note : Issue C.C. in two days B/o.
Rds