← Library
Madras High CourtWP/5496/2026disposed of

M/S.Vyan Systems Pvt.Ltd, v. The Deputy Inspector General Of Police,

2026-02-18Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA M/s.Vyan Systems Pvt.Ltd, Rep by its Proprietor Sivakumar, No.3/14,1st Cross street, Kalai Magal Street, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai - 32.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Service, Chennai-04.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith return the original Bank Guarantee furnished by the Petitioner as per the representation dated 03/11/2022 and pass orders. For Petitioner(s):

Ms.R.Hemalatha For Respondent(s):

Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 03.11.2022 and return the original bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner, forthwith.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was awarded a contract worth Rs.1,27,23,824/- for installation of CCTV with IP cameras in 50 police stations by the respondent, for which, the petitioner was required to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.6,36,191/- as performance security for a period of three years. The petitioner had furnished the bank guarantee and had also completed the work successfully without any adverse remarks. The warranty period had expired in March 2021. Even after a lapse of nearly 5 years, the respondent is not returning the original bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner has also addressed a representation to the respondent on 03.11.2022, despite which, there is no response from the respondent. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the aforesaid relief.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

4. Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent on instruction would submit that there is no proof of having received the petitioner's representation dated 03.11.2022 by the respondent nor the postal acknowledgement card is enclosed in the typed set of papers.

5. Taking into account the submission made by the respondent counsel that there is no proof that the representation of the petitioner dated 03.11.2022 having received by the respondent, the petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation and on receipt of such representation by the respondent, the respondent shall be consider the same and necessary action be taken, within a period of four weeks, thereafter.

6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 18-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order DS To:

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Service, Chennai-04

P.T.ASHA, J.

DS 18-02-2026