Dismissed

Padmavati Automotives v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Feb 2020WP/106658/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition challenging a tender notification for food-grain transportation. The court rejected the petition noting the petitioner failed to apply for the tender and a related challenge for a previous year's tender was dismissed, thus no first cause of action existed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was rejected and no direction was issued to quash the tender notification.

Padmavati Automotives Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.106658/2019 (GM-TEN)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

PADMAVATI AUTOMOTIVES REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, AKKAPPA PURUSHOTTAM KHATAGALLI, AGED ABOUT: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NEAR OLD BUS-STAND, HUKKERI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMER AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMER AFFAIRS, #8 CUNNINGHAM ROAD, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560052.

¶13

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DIST: BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI.

¶15

DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMER AFFAIRS, BELAGVI, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 30.01.2019 BEARING NO.FSA/RTT/CR/01/2018-20 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF FOOD-GRANINS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM KFCSC/TAPMCS/OTHER WHOLESALE NOMINEE GODOWNS TO FAIR PRICE DEPOT (RETAIL TRANSPORTATION) IN KHANAPUR AND RAMDURGA TALUK OF BELAGAVI DISTRICT BY ROAD FOR THE YEAR 2019-2021 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Tender Notification dated 30.1.2019 bearing No.FSA/RTT/CR/01/2018-20 issued by 2^nd respondent for transportation of food-grains and other items from the godown of Food Corporation to Fair Price Depot in Khanapur and Ramadurga Taluks of Belagavi District.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State.

¶24

The only ground urged by the petitioner is that his tender for the year 2018-19 was rejected and in respect of rejection WP No.106284/2018 is pending before this Court and there is interim order against the respondents not to precipitate the tender process. It is his submission that the respondents could not have invited the tender for supply of food-grains in respect of Ramadurga taluk, when the writ petition challenging the rejection of his tender for the year 2018-19 is pending.

¶25

¶26

In the instant case, admittedly, the tender

¶27

notification is for the year 2019-2021. The subject of pending writ petition was tender for the year 2018-19. This Court by order dated 24.2.2020 rejected WP No.106284/2018 relating to tender for the year 2018-19. Therefore, the only ground urged by the petitioner would not survive for consideration in view of the dismissal of the

¶28

pending writ petition. More over, in a matter like this, where distribution of food-grains to public is involved, public interest should prevail over private interest. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not applied for the tender in pursuance to tender notification dated 30.1.2019 vide Annexure-A. Hence, I decline to entertain this writ petition.

¶29

Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

JTR

Padmavati Automotives v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padmavati Automotives v. the State of Karnataka

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

Shri.Shivashankar S/O Doddabasappa Bakkannavar Vs Smt.Champa W/O Shashidar Kammar

Shankargouda S/O Ningangouda Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Arjunsa S/O Yellusa Katwa Vs Smt.Gangawwa W/O Vishwanath Nilogal

Shankar S/O Shankar Bangari @ Desai Vs the Thasildar

Shri. Ramswaroop Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri.Jayaram Shetty Vs Nawab S/O Gousemohiddin Chavadi