Disposed

M/s Gouri Sankar Electricals, v. The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2021WP/20252/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addressed a writ petition challenging the fresh floatation of tenders after the petitioners were declared L1. The court directed the respondents to verify the petitioners' representations on excess charges and defer finalization of tenders pending a decision by the Chairman & Managing Director.

What did the court decide?

Direction to verify representations dated 26.08.2021 and take appropriate action. Finalization of tenders received pursuant to the impugned tender notification deferred.

M/s Gouri Sankar Electricals, Vs The… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20252 OF 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

In the present Writ Petition, challenge is to the action of the second respondent, in floating the tenders vide S pecification No. e - Proc.No.59&61/2021-2022 for carrying out operation and maintenance, including watch and ward, housekeeping & gardening, MRT Assistance etc., in respect of 132 KV Sub-Station, Bommuru Division in OMC Circle, Rajahmahendravaram and Eluru Division in OMC Circle, Eluru, vide e- proceedings No.37/2021-22 and e-proceedings No.42/2021-22.

¶5

Heard Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the entire material available on record.

¶6

According to the petitioners, they are the existing contractors for the above said works. The Chief Engineer, APTRANSCO, Visakhapatnam-second respondent herein floated the tenders on 14.06.2021 for all the eight divisions in the Visakhapatnam Zone and the last date fixed for submission of tenders was 28.06.2021. The technical bid was opened on 28.06.2021 at 6.00 p.m., wherein the petitioners herein got qualified and the authorities opened the price bid at 7.00 p.m. on the said date and declared the petitioners as L1 in respect of the above mentioned sub-Stations.

¶7

Petitioners herein quoted 4.3% towards administrative/ supervision charges on the estimated contract value and, on 26.08.2021, according to the petitioners herein, they were called for negotiations and during the course of the said negotiations, they expressed their consent

¶8

¶9

for 2.89% excess and the petitioners herein also submitted representations to the said effect on 26.08.2021 to the Chief Engineer, APTRANSCO, Visakhapatnam-second respondent herein.

¶10

While the things being so, a fresh tender notification, dated 01.09.2021, which is the subject matter of the present Writ Petition, came to be issued calling for the bids afresh for the subject sub-Stations. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the said action of the respondents herein, in calling for the tenders afresh, though the petitioners herein emerged as L1, in pursuance of the earlier tender notification, dated 14.06.2021, is highly illegal, arbitrary, and a patent transgression of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, in respect of 220 KV sub-Station in OMC Circle, Srikakulam, 400 KV and 220 KV sub-Station in OMC Circle, Vizianagaram, 132 KV sub-Stations in OMC Circle, Vizianagaram, and 400 KV and 220 KV sub-Station at Kakinada Division in OMC Circle, Rajamahendravaram and 220 KV sub-Station at Nidadavolu Division in OMC Circle, Eluru, second respondent herein issued a Memo, dated 27.08.2021, granting extension in favour of the existing contractors. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the impugned action is also highly discriminatory and, on this ground also, the impugned fresh tender process cannot be sustained.

¶11

Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submits that, in respect of the subject works, since the Department received single tender, respondents are proceeding with the process of inviting tenders afresh.

¶12

¶13

It is also the submission of the learned Standing Counsel that the issue is now pending consideration before the Chairman & Managing Director of the APTRANSCO, Vijayawada, including the request of the petitioners in their representations, dated 26.08.2021. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, though in respect of Gajuwaka Division of Visakhapatnam Circle the Department received single valid tender, the bid offered by one Mr.P.Narayana Rao came to be accepted by the respondents and the Department entrusted the work in his favour and, according to the learned counsel, the impugned action is also liable to be treated as illegal on the said ground.

¶14

According to the information available before this Court, since the issue, as regards the request made by the petitioners vide representations, dated 26.08.2021, wherein the petitioners expressed their consent for 2.89% excess instead of 4.3% is pending consideration before the Chairman & Managing Director, APTRANSCO-first respondent herein, this Court, in the facts and circumstances of the case, deems it appropriate and apposite to dispose of the present Writ Petition with a direction to the respondents to verify the representations, dated 26.08.2021, submitted by the petitioners herein, and take appropriate action/pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, taking into consideration the issues raised by the petitioners herein in their representations, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that, till a decision is taken by the respondents, as indicated

¶15

¶16

supra, finalisation of the tenders, if any, received pursuant to the impugned tender notification, shall be deferred.

¶17

Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶18

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶19

___________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

¶20

Date: 14.09.2021

¶21

Note:

¶22

Furnish C.C. of the order today. B/O siva

¶23

¶24

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.20252 OF 2021

¶26

Date: 14.09.2021

¶27

siva

M/s Gouri Sankar Electricals, v. The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Gouri Sankar Electricals, v. The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaggavarapu Venugopala Reddy, Vs A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Limited

Sunkavalli Dhanamjayudu Vs The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation

Sri Sai Enterprises Vs The Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation limited

Ande Krishna Murthy Vs the Vidyut Ombudsman, Hyderabad, and 4 Otrs.

V.E. Venkatesulu Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Vallur Usha Rani, Vs The Honble Court of the First Additional Munsif Magistrate