IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.50671/2018 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
HI-TECH ENGINEERS REP BY ITS ONE OF THE PARTNER RAJIV SOOD S/O S L SOOD AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS #52, S-MIG/A, 4TH BLOCK 4TH PHASE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE-560 064 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI AKARSH S. KANADE, ADVOCATE – ABSENT ) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY M S BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KOLARA CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT CO-OPEARATIVE MILK PRODUCERS SOCIEITIES UNION LTD.
DAIRY KOLAR DAIRY CAMPUS NH-75, HUTHUR POST KOLARA 563 103 3. A V R ENTERPRISES REP BY APPAIAH VITTAPPANHALLI RAMESH S/O APPAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT VITTAPPANAHALLI S B HALLI POST KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-563101 ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD:3.11.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2 AT ANNEXURE-G AND ANNEXURE-H TO H(B); DIRECT THE R-2 TO OPEN THE BID UNDER NOTIFICATION DTD:23.6.2018 AND TO CONSIDER THE LOWEST BIDDER TO GRANT THE TENDER.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R None for the petitioner.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
a. Quash the impugned order dated 3.11.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent i.e, the Managing Director, Kolara-Chickballapura District, Co- operative Milk Producers’ Societies Union Ltd. at Annexure-G and Annexure-H to H (B);
b. Direct the respondent No.2 to open the bid applied by the petitioner under e-procurement portal bid under notification No.KOMUL/Admn/ eTender/2388/2017-18 dated 23.6.2018 and to consider the lowest bidder to grant the tender.
3. From perusal of the averments made in the petition, it is evident that the contract has already been awarded in favour of the respondent No.3. The petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under Section 16 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999.
4. Needless to state that in case the petitioner files an appeal within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of order passed today, the Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months therefrom after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties and shall extend the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Sd/- JUDGE MD