Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M/S Spiderman Xpress P Ltd vs Senior Divisional Commercial Manager

High Court Of Karnataka|14 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.28990 OF 2016 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
M/s. Spiderman Xpress (P) Ltd., A company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Office at Raghavendra Complex, II Floor, Avenue Road Cross, Cubbonpet, near Banappa Park, Bengaluru – 560 002.
Represented by its Director.
… Petitioner (By Sri.M.Nagaprasanna, Sr. Advocate a/w Smt.M.N.Suvarna, Advocate) AND:
Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, South Western Railway, Bengaluru – 560 023.
(By Sri.N.S.Sanjaygowda, Advocate) … Respondent This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the entire records leading to the communication dated 11.3.2016 and tender notification dated 25.4.2016; quash the communication dated 11.3.2016 (under Annexure-K to the writ petition) by which tender notification dated 22.7.2015 is discharged and tender notification dated 25.4.2016 (under Annexure-L to the writ petition) both issued by the respondent by issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari and consequently direct the respondent by issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus to complete the tender process pursuant to tender notification dated 22.7.2015 issued by the respondent and award the tender to the petitioner forthwith and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.M.Nagaprasanna, learned Senior Counsel along with Smt.M.N.Suvarna, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.N.S.Sanjaygowda, learned counsel for the respondent.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for both parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of communication dated 11.03.2016, by which the tender notification dated 22.07.2015 has been discharged and tender notification dated 25.04.2016 has been issued.
3. The facts giving raise to filing of the writ petition briefly stated are that on 22.07.2015 respondent invited open tenders vide tender notice for leasing of Parcel Van space of 23 tonnnes in passenger carrying train i.e., in Train No.12864/63 operating between Yeshwanthpur and Howrah. Two tenderers had submitted their bids in response to the aforesaid notice inviting tender and the petitioner was declared as successful bidder as his bid was the highest. On 09.10.2015, the petitioner was directed to furnish his financial statement. Thereafter, the petitioner on 19.01.2016 was called for negotiation. However, by communication dated 11.03.2016, tender notification dated 22.07.2015 was discharged and new tender notification dated 25.04.2016 was issued.
4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties at length. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length, it is not necessary for this Court to enter into the merits of the matter. It is pertinent to note that a Bench of this Court by an order dated 17.05.2016 had stayed the tender notification dated 25.04.2016. The aforesaid order has remained in force for a period of more than two and half years. Therefore, the tender notification dated 25.04.2016 has lost its efficacy by efflux of time. Accordingly, the same is quashed. The respondent is granted liberty to issue fresh tender notification expeditiously.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Needless to state that the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded to them within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today.
In view of the disposal of main petition, pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration. Hence, dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M/S Spiderman Xpress P Ltd vs Senior Divisional Commercial Manager

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 February, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe