Sriram v. The General Manager

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.13404 & 13405 of 2025 Sriram ... Petitioner Vs

1. The General Manager, DD 160, Dindigul District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., No.9, East Govindapuram, Dindigul - 624 001.

2. M/s.The Hindustan Security Facility Management, Dindigul - 624 004.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent AOC proceedings in Tender ID 2025_TCMPF_554591_4, dated 16.06.2025 and quash the same as illegal.

For petitioner : Mr.S.Poornachandran For respondents : Mr.K.Prabhu for R1 Mr.V.O.S.Kaladi Selvam for R2 1/6

*****

ORDER

This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the first respondent and learned counsel for the second respondent.

2. Prima facie, the petitioner appears to have made out a case that the second respondent has been awarded contract, pursuant to the tender floated on 05.05.2025 by accepting the bid of the second respondent, which is contrary to the terms and conditions of the tender documents.

3. The petitioner appears to have offered Rs.30.24/- towards service charges, which is a minimum of 4% over and above the basic wages per day per person to be entered by bidder. However, the second respondent appears to have offered 3.96% that is Rs.30/-, which contrary to the tender document. However, the fact remains that the work order has already been issued to the second respondent on 16.06.2025. The petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Appellate Authority in terms of Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in 2/6

Tender Act, 1998.

4. Therefore, liberty is given to the petitioner to challenge the same before the Appellate Authority under the provisions of Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Act, 1998 within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. The continuance of the second respondent, pursuant to work order, will be subject to the final out come of the order to be passed by the Appellate Authority.

6. In case the tender contract that has been awarded to the second respondent and the work order that has been issued on 16.06.2025 are found fault with by the Appellate Authority, the petitioner shall be given work order for the entire three years from the aforesaid date. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. In case an appeal is filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of 3/6

a copy of this order.

8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall also implead the second respondent in the proposed appeal to be filed.

9. Till such time, status quo prevailing as on date shall continue.

10. This Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 27.06.2025 Internet : Yes / No apd 4/6

C.SARAVANAN, J.

apd 5/6

27.06.2025 6/6