.1-
IN mun HIGH counm or KARNAEAKA Am 3ANgA£ofiE ; 3
nammn THIS THE 12"'nmx or MARCH, ߤO3ft R
BEFORE:"
mun HON'BLE Mr. JUsm1c:Vg;L}fiAn5U$hmH:" "x
WRIT pmrzrxon No{3§S1;2ods.{a§wnfii""w "
EQTQEEEH 2
_ _.---_..
lf Q hvnunb-usrnav u/n "fif. 'l"
LI Ii'; up an.
oIul¢fl'InInIunlll"l-|-l-|I§l-I- J Jr:
Srinivaa Gowda, 41 yearh}7
R/at fia.921, 22"'mmin;V *_y
38" Cross, 4§5'Tfi Blo¢kg,° fu
Jayanagag l'2Ia:&£igfal,d:ce'-a.4i1._.. ' ,_ FETiTi
(By Adfigqafiavs£1;3i§iafH§g@§$
: . _ . , . . .
1. Thé«Connua§i§né£;:"<"
BxuhétMEangalére_fiahanagara Pa1;ka,
n, R . sq'::3_re»,_ Bangalore.
s.m_ 2{rTha,Execu£i¢a Engineer tublleshwaram),
3-'.-|..-_;. I'\.. ..,1. en A au...._..-.|..
QC"!!!-Hill'-._KfiLJB ' H a BI o § In-L 335- '
'"'5ruhat"§a3ga1ore Mhhanagara Palika,
'*_Banga;a:e; .. ass? fififififfi
*,(By*Aޤ6cate Sr1.K.N.Puttegowda)
-----nu-I
°§wh1a Writ Petition is filed under Arta.226 5
2227 of The Constitution of India to call for the
récorda leading to the short tern: tender
V""ngt;£igat;gn éateé 29=2=2QGB pub;;gheé in Degga;
Harald English Daily on 2.3.2008 (Annexure--A) by
n. :5 aaaiu. n.|. I-Ina. 'awn. IIGICI-h av \.'_uu.n.u. uuw sinus: cI.u\.I. av
direct the respondents to' accept the...'
eiihinitteci by the petitioner.
This Petition is eozningtan gr’
hearing this day, the Court matde the ?£o.1l.ewé.ng’:’*e«’
onnm;____§
.. .Ir:I….nt to *.:…e notgffitcatien asst-ed by R=2
……-‘ated 7.12 zoev 5-: the parpese of re-Ch”p
eazp”–etinq of read: :in”»Biéathij£ere’,o1’ds’extension in
ward ‘tie. at _ submitted his
tender. over and above the
scheduétedv Respondents after
opening’ the that the rate quoted by
the petitionevrw 1.3: on higher side by the letter of
Ma-25L,j A. 29.1’1′;’:2o*o’a called the petitioner for
According to the petitioner, on
113..2-;’2ooa–i’–“;1;¢e* has sent a proposal stating that he
is m.1:,ng0 to execute the work at 9.9% abeve the
‘”1-géatehe of 2007-08. But without considering his
male on ;4L2;2008,. tend._r has been re-
.c:£a: to the petitioner, he did n’t —
.3-
question in this petition by the petitione__r”‘pj*
two grounds. According to the ‘y§t1g1$ne:;_t.
respondents should not have ioencelitad
notification without considering thin” ,ot’.€ea: ”
to e2=_-onte t__e w_-1; -3; redicing he grate ducted
by h”’.’. and that the _ notification: is
contrary to ‘”‘e *p:r:f’?’;::i’ns 63′: “”‘ii”‘1′:’.a.|(a.”‘””
Transparency ants Act,;’I.§§§
(‘The Anti. ..the::e””ie no sufficient
time of ’30 V the tender as per
Anne:i._Vu.re-A. ” « . %
2 Counsel for the respondent: contends t..e.t
.th’e.s’.azne”” ._ei’nce there was an urgency in the matter
the notification was cancelled as the
ipo£fe:t’v..aiuoted by the petitioner was not acceptable
to Ethe respondents. It is the further case of
it ___the respondents that respondents at any time
before acceptance of the tender can cancel the
JV
\
.4-
notification and call for re–tender in K
interest of the corporation. ‘rha’.?5§£a¥’§”i’ ‘
contends that the order of Iv
earlier notification and public.-Qgion
notiiieation cannot hey~.__gue£tioneé1′-.’ ‘the ” V
Inn’-.’I petitiener =1-.o-$1.5 ; ‘5-,.eee’pted.. he
further contend: hat. :1″ use ‘erg-‘6″
after the proper authority; has been issued withotit 30 days 3.5 required under Aot he requests the court to (1.? under' " the .
.3», i_iav.in§~,hearc’1 “e eeiinsel fer the as-ties id
pIi’i”___ V. of records prociuoed by the
corporation, it is olear that the authorities had
not accepted the tender of the petitioner for the
“”V’,:aa§cns stated therein. If the authorities have
H_;£ot accepted the offer trade by the petitioner on
the ground that the same was on higher side, same
t°-/
.5.
cannot be questioned by the petitiOn€,37–‘.._.’A4’a;§”e:’
tender submittecl by the .petitioner”«’.__: waa7}nu£._’t
accepted on the ground thafiti” the on;
higher side. The tender “S 1:15-.–_1,ApA’ –. .133; ffi:i:£é:._
petitioner is only aniiofifier. iVi_u”‘:..;:E6r the’ V
authority to accept or not’ .._vsince” -no jiries 9.1:
1317 ¢__i__._s; :n- sans-i3-mg-I; -I-he
contention, euthority has given
perxnisvsion” ~ tendon without there being
clear than ‘–daysVV.’i:nv_»i’itLs”»«wisdom, this court cannot
interferei “w:L_1”:h. ,th§’«._s5a§d court also.
the, oo_u::i.A’p:’*i:o permi i: the petitioner to participate
in the__A’:re–tender process. If the petitioner is
to do so within the stipulated ‘t:I.me as
V. per the tender notification Annexure-A, it is
always open for him in the _ tender and .1’.£ such
«V
.5.
tender is submitted by the petitioner,
to be considered by the respondents ;p a§cd;d§ndg{u’g
with law.