← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8195/2025dismissed

T.S.Yoganandh v. The Chairman And Managing Director (Fac)

2026-06-03Honourable Mr.Justice Hemant Chandangoudar8 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03-06-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6146, 7359 & 7360 of 2025 T.S.Yoganandh .. Petitioner in both cases - Vs. -

1. The Chairman and Managing Director (FAC), Poombukar Shipping Corporation Limited, No. 692, (Old No. 473), Annasalai, 4th Floor, Nandhanam, Chennai - 35.

2. The Manager, Poombukar Shipping Corporation, Kanyakumari Ferry Service, Agastheeswaram Block, Kanyakumari - 629702.

.. 1st & 2nd Respondent in both cases

3. The General Secretary, Poombukar Shipping Corporation, Labor Union, Reg.No. 611/kkm, Poombukar Shipping Corporation Kanyakumari Ferry Service Premises, Kanyakumari, .. 3rd Respondent in WP(MD)No.8195/2025 1/8

3.The Secretary, Kanniyakumari Poompuhar Kappal Pokkuvarthu Kazhga Paniyalarkal Nala Sangam, SRG/Kanniyakumari / 75/2021, Kanniyakumari- 629 702.

.. 3rd Respondent in WP(MD)No.9867/2025 Prayer in WP(MD)No.8195 of 2025: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to float the tender for the awarding contract for manage the canteen at the 2nd respondent premises only through Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and Rules 2000, by considering the representation dated 21.09.2024 within the time frame.

Prayer in WP(MD). 9867/ 2025 : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent pertaining to its impugned work order in PSC/Admin/ KFS/ Canteen/ 2025 dated 17.03.2025 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to float the tender for awarding contract for manage the canteen at the 2nd respondent premises only through Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and Rules 2000, by considering the representation dated 21.09.2024 within the time frame.

2/8

In both cases:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.SC.Herold Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff Government Advocate COMMON ORDER In W.P.(MD) No.8195 of 2025, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to award the contract for management of the canteen in the premises of the second respondent only by following the procedure prescribed under the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and the Rules framed thereunder.

2. In W.P.(MD) No.9867 of 2025, the petitioner challenges the work order dated 17.03.2025 issued by the first respondent in favour of the third respondent for running and managing the canteen in the premises of the second respondent.

3/8

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the work order dated 17.03.2025 was initially issued for a period of twelve months commencing from 01.04.2025 and that the said period has already expired.

4. Admittedly, the work order was issued in favour of the third respondent, which is a welfare association of the employees of the first respondent. The canteen is being run by the third respondent for the benefit and welfare of the employees and not for any commercial purpose. The arrangement is essentially intended to provide canteen facilities to the employees of the establishment.

5. The Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 has been enacted to ensure transparency in public procurement and to regulate the procedure for inviting and accepting tenders in matters involving procurement by Government departments and public authorities. The facts of the present case do not disclose any public procurement activity 4/8

attracting the provisions of the said Act.

6. The arrangement under the impugned work order is in the nature of permitting the third respondent to occupy and use the premises for running a welfare canteen for the benefit of employees. The relationship between the first respondent and the third respondent is essentially that of a licensor and licensee/landlord and tenant. Therefore, the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and the Rules framed thereunder have no application to the facts of the present case.

7. In such circumstances, the prayer sought in W.P.(MD) No.8195 of 2025 for a direction to follow the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 is not maintainable. Likewise, no ground is made out to interfere with the work order challenged in W.P. (MD) No.9867 of 2025.

8. Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions stand dismissed. 5/8

9.There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

03-06-2026 Index :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No PJL To

1. The Chairman and Managing Director (FAC), Poombukar Shipping Corporation Limited, No. 692, (Old No. 473), Annasalai, 4th Floor, Nandhanam, Chennai - 35.

2. The Manager, Poombukar Shipping Corporation, Kanyakumari Ferry Service, Agastheeswaram Block, Kanyakumari - 629702.

3. The General Secretary, Poombukar Shipping Corporation, Labor Union, Reg.No. 611/kkm, Poombukar Shipping Corporation Kanyakumari Ferry Service Premises, Kanyakumari, Kanniyakumari District.

4. The Secretary, Kanniyakumari Poompuhar Kappal Pokkuvarthu Kazhga Paniyalarkal Nala Sangam, SRG/Kanniyakumari / 75/2021, Kanniyakumari- 629 702.

6/8

7/8

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

PJL W.P(MD) Nos. 8195 and 9867 of 2025 03.06.2026 8/8