IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.55574/2017 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
SRI. D. KRISHNARAJ, S/O SRI. SUBBARAYA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S. RAJ BOREWELLS, UPPINANGADI, PUTTUR TALUK – 574 201 DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M., ADV.) AND:
1. DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, (GOVT. OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING) BENGALURU – 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. THE CHAIRMAN, TENDER ACCEPTING AUTHORITY, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU – 575001.
3. DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, G.H.S. ROAD, JANATHA BAZAR BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, MANGALURU – 575001 REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT MANAGER.
4. M/S. YAMUNA BOREWELLS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. KRISHNAIAH SHETTY S/O SRI. RAMANNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, APOORVA SANKEERNA, MAIN ROAD, DARBE, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT, DAKSHINA KANNADA – 574 202. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD 17.11.2017 ISSUED BY R-3 AND THE PROCEEDINGS DTD 03.11.2017 OF THE DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED TENDER ACCEPTING COMMITTEE MEETING HELD UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, D.K. DISTRICT THEREBY REJECTING THE TENDER OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF PACKAGE NO.4 (BELTHANGADY M.L.A CONSTITUENCE), PURSUANT TO TENDER NOTIFICATION DTD 23.06.2017 CALLING FOR TENDERS FOR BOREWELLS UNDER “NO WATER, NO MONEY” SCHEME, VIDE ANNX-A AND B CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CALL FOR FRESH TENDER/RETENDER THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is assailing the endorsement dated 17.11.2017 whereunder, reasons have been assigned for holding the tender submitted by the petitioner as not being responsive and in the said tender process, the respondent No.4 being the successful tenderer has been awarded the work.
2. If that be the position, the petitioner is required to avail the remedy of appeal as provided under Section 16 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 1999. If the appeal is filed within two weeks from this day, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same on merits without reference to the delay, if any.
3. Hence, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal, the petition stands disposed of. Registry to return the documents, if any sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sd/- JUDGE ST