← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/2305/2018closed

S.Arumugam v. Regional Director Of Municipal

2023-11-23Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.11.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P(MD).Nos.3456, 2513 and 2514 of 2018 S.Arumugam .. Petitioner vs.

1.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, O/o.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Regional Executive Officer, O/o.Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Commissioner, Ambasamudram Municipality, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Municipal Engineer, The Ambasamudram Municipality Office, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

1/5

5.Rajamohamad .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender ID:2017-MAWS80637-1 in the third respondent Municipality as per the e-tender notice ROC.No.E1/387/2017 dated 06.12.2017 and the sanctioned work order issued by the third respondent in favour of the fifth respondent vide No.ROC.No.E1/387/17 dated 06.12.2017 and quash the same as illegal and void and thereby, directing the third respondent to make this petitioner as a qualified bidder under provisions of the Tamil Nadu Tender Transparency Act, 1998 and Rules.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam Government Advocate for R1, R2 and R4 Mr.M.Raja Rajan for R3 *****

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the rejection of application made by the petitioner for tender work in the third respondent Municipality and the sanctioned work order issued by the third respondent vide ROC.No.E1/387/17 dated 06.12.2017 in favour of the fifth respondent, and for a consequential direction to the third respondent to make the petitioner as qualified bidder under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Tender Transparency Act, 1998. 2/5

2. The petitioner is a contractor and has participated in a tender floated by the third respondent Municipality. However, his application was rejected by the third respondent, as against which, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent submits that pending this Writ Petition, Work Order was issued to the successful bidder and the work has also been executed.

4. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, nothing survives for adjudication in this Writ Petition.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index :

Yes / No 23.11.2023 NCC :

Yes / No (2/3) Internet :

Yes ssb 3/5

To 1.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, O/o.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Regional Executive Officer, O/o.Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Commissioner, Ambasamudram Municipality, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Municipal Engineer, The Ambasamudram Municipality Office, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ssb 23.11.2023 (2/3) 5/5