IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.15725/2019 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
M/S. SHRI SHIRADI SAI PROVISION STORES, OFFICE AT M.G.ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 101, REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. SANTHOSH, S/O MR. S VENKATESH, AGE 43 YEARS. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI HEMANT CHANDAN GOUDAR, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 101.
3. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, BACKWARD CLASS WELFARE DEPARTMENT, NEAR DC OFFICE, TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR-572 101.
4. M/S MARUTHI ENTERPRISES, MAIN ROAD SORABA TALUK, SORABA-577 429, REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MRS. K. B. BHARATHI. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE AND QUASH BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER, THE NOTIFICATION DATED 08.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri. Hemant Chandan Goudar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
a) Declare and quash by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order, the notification bearing No.BCM3/Va.Ni.Sha/Ah.Sa.Tender/ C.R-77/2018-19 dated 08.03.2019 issued by the Respondent No.2 vide Annexure-G.
b) Declare and quash by issuing a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other Writ or Order, the Work Order bearing No.BCM3/Va.Ni.Sha/Ah.Sa.Tender/ C.R-77/2018-19 dated 08.03.2019 issued by the Respondent No.2 vide Annexure-H.
c) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other direction directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to reject the Tender of the respondent No.2 for quoting the freak rates and consequently allot the tender to the petitioner.
2. When the matter was taken up today, Sri.
Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate raised an objection that the petitioner has sought quashment of the work order, which has been issued by respondent No.2 and the petitioner has the remedy of filing an appeal under Section 16 of the Karnataka Transparency In Public Procurements Act, 1999. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the order dated 08.03.2019 has been passed in pursuance of the order passed by the State Government dated 07.04.2018, the appeal does not lie.
4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. Even assuming the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner to be correct, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner has not assailed the validity of the Government Order dated 07.04.2018 in this writ petition. Therefore, in the absence of any challenge to the Government Order dated 07.04.2018, no effective relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition.
5. Needless to state that the petitioner shall be at liberty to assail the validity of the order dated 07.04.2018 passed by the State Government, if so advised, in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RD