IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.51400 OF 2017 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
GUJARAT ECO MICROBIAL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, B-5 MADHUR MILLAN SOCIETY, HIGH TENSION LINE ROAD, SUBHANPURA VADODARA-390 023 REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED PERSON DILIP M S.
… PETITIONER (BY MR. AMSHITH HEGDE.H.S, ADV.) AND:
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
(BY MR. M.B.PRABHAKAR, ADV.) - - -
… RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT TO ISSUE THE COMPLETE STATUS OF TENDER PROCESS AND PROFILES OF FINALISED CONTRACTORS WHO BIDS (BIDDERS) WITH REGARDS TO TENDER REFERENCE DATED 28.5.2017 AT ANEX-A BY RESPONDENT, ISSUED TOWARDS DESIGNING, PROCUREMENT, INSTALLATION AND COMMISSIONING OF AERATION SYSTEM IN BELLANDUR LAKE, BENGALURU CITY; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Amshith Hegde H.S., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.M.B.Prabhakar, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing respondent to issue the complete status of tender process and profiles of finalized contractors who bids (bidders) with regards to tender reference No.BDA/EE(E)/TEN/03/2016-17, dated 28.05.2017 (Annexure-A) by respondent issued towards designing, Procurement, Installation and Commissioning of Aeration System in Bellandur Lake, Bengaluru City.
(b) Issue a writ in a nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the respondent to re evaluate the tender applications of petitioner and another bidder from HARVINS Company.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that on the recommendations made by the National Green Tribunal, the approach has been abundant and therefore, the relief as sought for by the petitioner has rendered infructuous.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner however, prayed for adjournment in order to enable him to seek instructions.
6. I have considered the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. In the fact situation of the case once the counsel with reasons has made a submission before this Court that there has been a tender in question has already been abandoned in view of the recommendations made by the National Company Law Tribunal, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition and the petitioner in any case is not in a position to inform the learned counsel whether or not the aforesaid writ petition has rendered infructuous as the issued is decided by this Court.
7. In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the respondent, which is place on record, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE SS