Dismissed

M/S Meritrain Education Services v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Apr 2021WP/25994/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged fresh tender invitations, claiming violation of their existing work order rights. The Court held the petition lacked merits as the tender period had expired and the managing director of the consortium partner received an EMD refund, rendering the case infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed, and pending interlocutary applications are disposed of. No costs awarded.

M/S Meritrain Education Services Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

W.P. No.25994/2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION No.25994 OF 2017 (GM-TEN)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

M/S MERITRAIN EDUCATION SERVICES REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR AND CEO D.L. VENKATESH SHARMA OFFICE AT NO.15 PLOT NO.1 AND 2 FLAT NO.305 SURYA PREMA BLOG 1^ST CROSS, KANAKAPURA ROAD MANJUNATHANAGAR BENGALURU-560 109 ... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SHRI. H.V. HARISH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND :

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA

¶13

BENGALURU-560 001

¶14

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (K.R.E.I.S) NO.8, 6^TH FLOOR

¶15

CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560 052

¶16

KARNATAKA STATE ELECTORNICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (KEONICS) 2^ND FLOOR, TTMC 'A BLOCK

¶17

BMTC, SHANTHINAGAR

¶18

¶19

W.P. No.25994/2017

¶20

K.H.ROAD BENGALURU-560 027

¶21

REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ... RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SHRI. M. VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1; SHRI. NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SHRI. Y.H. GANESH BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH INVITING FRESH TENDER CALLED FOR BY RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 FOR PROVIDING TRAINING ON ENGLISH COMMUNICATIONS SKILLS AND CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT /SOFT SKILLS FOR TEACHING AND NONTEACHING STAFF OF RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS. COLLEGES IN KALBURGI, BELAGAVI AND BENGALURU DIVISIONS, AT ANNEX-A WHICH IS PUBLISHED IN TIMES OF INDIA, ENGLISH EDITION DATED 20.05.2017 AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 10.03.2021, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petitioner has filed this writ petition with a prayer inter alia to quash the tender Notification dated 19.05.2017 published in Times of India Newspaper on 20.05.2017.

¶27

Shri. Harish, learned Advocate for petitioner submitted that petitioner imparts training on English communication skills and provides similar services. Along with its consortium partner, petitioner has submitted its bid for four divisions namely Bengaluru, Mysuru, Belagavi and

¶28

¶29

W.P. No.25994/2017 Kalaburagi on 30.11.2016. Respondents issued work order on 08.03.2017 for Mysuru division. Petitioner has been imparting the training as per the terms and conditions of the work order.

¶30

Respondents No. 1 and 2 have again called for fresh tender as per Annexure-A dated 20.05.2017 for providing training in English communication skills in Kalaburagi, Belagavi and Bengaluru divisions without cancelling the existing tender and the same has affected petitioner's right.

¶31

Shri. Nagaiah, for second respondent submitted that the first tender was for the year 2016 and 2017. Since there was an anonyms call with regard to finalization of tender, an enquiry was instituted and therefore, the second tender has been called. He further submitted that petitioner's consortium partner namely the KEONICS has sought and received the refund of EMD in respect of Bengaluru, Belagavi and Kalaburagi Divisions as per

¶32

¶33

W.P. No.25994/2017

¶34

Annexures - R-4, 5 & 6. Therefore, this writ petition is rendered infructuous.

¶35

I have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.

¶36

Shri. Nagaiah is right in his submission that as per Annexures - R-4, 5 & 6, petitioner's consortium partner KEONICS has obtained refund of EMD amount. Further as per Shri. Nagaiah the instant tender was for the year 2016-17 and the same is not disputed by the petitioner.

¶37

In view of the above, this writ petition is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed.

¶38

In view of dismissal of the writ petition,

¶39

pending interlocutary applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same are disposed of.

¶40

No costs.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

M/S Meritrain Education Services v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Meritrain Education Services v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Manjunatha Traders Vs Department of Mines and Geology

Puttaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Narayanachari Vs the State of Karnataka

Ramanjinappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Shimsha Sahakara Bank Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M S Nagaraj Vs the Registrar