IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.46266 OF 2014 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
M/s. SLN Industries The Proprietary Concern, Represented by its Proprietor, Sri. P.M. Rajagopala Reddy, S/o Late Mallesh Reddy, Aged about 69 years, Having its Principal Place of Business at No.10, Dharmendra Nilaya, 1st Main Road, 1st Cross, Behind Sun Rise School, Hebbal Kempapura, Bengaluru – 560 024 ... Petitioner (By Sri. A. Rajesh, Advocate for Sri. G.S. Venkata Subba Rao, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka By its Prl. Secretary, Department of Energy, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. M/s. Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Corporation Ltd., A Govt. of Karnataka Undertaking Having its Corporate Office at No.927, LJ Avenue, New Kantharaj Urs Road, Saraswathipuram, Mysuru – 570 009, Rep. by its Managing Director.
3. The Superintendent Engineer (Electrical) Purchase, M/s. Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Corporation Ltd., A Govt. of Karnataka Undertaking Having its Corporate Office at No.927, LJ Avenue, New Kantharaj Urs Road, Saraswathipuram, Mysuru – 570 009. …Respondents (By Sri. Ninan Abraham, Advocate for Sri. S. Sriranga, Advocate for R-2 & R-3 Smt. Niloufer Akbar, AGA for R-1) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned tender notification issued through the e-procurement portal by respondent Nos.2 and 3 vide tender vide Annexure-A and the subsequent corrigendum dated 12.09.2014 vide Annexure-J and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This writ petition is directed against the tender notification issued by respondent Nos.2 and 3 dated 12.09.2014 at Annexure-A.
2. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has filed a memo dated 01.02.2019 along with official memorandum stating that the tender notification dated 12.09.2014 had been cancelled due to administrative reasons.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE MBM