S.K.Subba Reddiar v. The Superintending Engineer(Highways)
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:04.09.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.15620 and 15621 of 2019 S.K.Subba Reddiar ... Petitioner vs.
1.The Superintending Engineer(Highways), NABARD and Rural roads, Tirunelveli Circle, Reserve Line Road, Ilanthaikulam, Palayamkottai Post, Tirunelveli District.
2.G.Saravana Priya ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned work order issued by the first respondent in br.K.f.vz; .TRP.139/2018-2019/t1 dated 22.02.2019 in favour of the second resppondent and quash the same as it has been issued in violation of Section 8 of Tamilnadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1988 and Rule 21 and 22 of the Tamilnadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 and consequently direct the first respondent to issue work order to the petitioner based on the tender submitted on 04.01.2019 for the work in Sl.No.12(package No.17) in the tender notification no.17/2018-2019/D1, dated 29.11.2018 within the stipulated period as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Radhakrishnan for M/s Ananth C.Rajesh For Respondents : Mr.M.Pandiarajan Additional Government Pleader for R.1
ORDER
Mr.G.Radhakrishnan, learned Counsel on record for the writ petitioner and Mr.M.Pandiarajan, learned Additional Government Pleader, who has accepted notice on behalf of the first respondent 1/3
are before this Court.
2. Writ petitioner has assailed a works contract which has been issued in favour of the second respondent contractor, pursuant to a tender notification No.17/2018-2019/D1 dated 29.11.2018 (hereinafter 'said tender' for the sake of brevity).
3. It may not be necessary to go into grounds assailing the work order issued pursuant to said tender, as the writ petitioner has abridged and restricted the prayer as well as the scope of the writ petition drastically.
4. Learned Counsel for writ petitioner, on instructions, submitted that substantial work has been done by the second respondent, pursuant to the impugned work order and therefore, it will suffice if a direction is given to the official respondent authorities to refund Earnest Money Deposit (EMD), which is lying with the official respondent authorities, pursuant to writ petitioner's participation in the said tender.
5. Responding to this, Mr.M.Pandiarajan, learned Additional Government Pleader, who has accepted notice on behalf of the first respondent obtained instructions and on instructions submitted that refund of EMD qua the said tender and cheque for the same is ready and that the writ petitioner can collect it from the office of the Divisional Engineer (Highways), NABARD and Rural road, Tirunelveli Circle, Reserve Line Road, Ilanthaikulam, Palayamkottai Post, Tirunelveli District by tomorrow during working hours between half past nine in the forenoon (09.30 a.m.) and 05.00 p.m.
6. As this puts an end to the limited controversy now in the instant writ petition, instant writ petition is disposed of recording the aforesaid submission of learned State Counsel made on instructions. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
7. Though the writ petition is disposed, Registry is directed to list this matter under the caption "FOR REPORTING COMPLIANCE" on 09.09.2019.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) 2/3
To 1.The Superintending Engineer(Highways), NABARD and Rural roads, Tirunelveli Circle, Reserve Line Road, Ilanthaikulam, Palayamkottai Post, Tirunelveli District.
2.The Division Engineer (Highways), NABARD and Rural roads, Tirunelveli Circle, Reserve Line Road, Ilanthaikulam, Palayamkottai Post, Tirunelveli District.
04.09.2019 SSL JMN(06.09.2019) 3P : 3C 3/3