Disposed

Acetec Motors Pvt. Ltd. v. the Secretary to Govt. of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2022WP/10229/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of proceedings under a tender for procuring 3 wheelers. Respondent submitted the successful bidder had already supplied goods. Court held prayer does not survive considering completion of process and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of; petitioner directed to file appeal under Section 16 of the Karnataka Transparency In Public Procurements Act, 1999, if aggrieved.

Acetec Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Secretary to… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.10229/2021 (GM-TEN)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

ACETEC MOTORS PVT LTD NO.27/1, 4th A MAIN ROAD METRO LAYOUT, NAYANDAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 026 REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. GENERAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SHRI ANAND B.S. … PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI ARAVIND M.NEGLUR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KARNATAKA RURAL & PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPT. VIDHANA SOUDHA

¶12

BENGALURU - 560 001

¶13

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ZILLA PANCHAYAT CHITRADURGA - 577 501

¶14

M/S GANESH MOTORS NO.868/2A-2G, OPP: LIC OFFICE P.B.ROAD, DAVANAGERE - 577 006 REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR

¶15

SHRI.GANESH PRASAD …RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN C.BASAREDDY, GA FOR R1; SRI. N.PRAVEEN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶17

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANCE OF TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 23.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE R2 FOR PROCURING 3 WHEELER CUSTOMIZED BOX TIPPER WITH WET AND DRY PARTITION INCLUDING ANNOUNCEMENT SYSTEM WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEAIRNG IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Learned GA accepts notice for respondent No.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the present petition.

¶22

In the present petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to quash the further proceedings in pursuance to the tender notification bearing No.JPanche/Abhi/Swabhami/CR-144/2/2020-21 dated 23.03.2021 issued by respondent No.2 for procuring of 3 wheeler customized box tipper with wet and dry partition including announcement system (auto tipper diesel) and also for a prayer seeking direction for quashing of all the further proceedings under tender

¶23

¶24

document issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure-C and D)

¶25

It is submitted by respondent No.2 that respondent No.1 had called for a short term tender in respect of procuring of 3 wheeler customized box tipper with wet and dry partition including the announcement system and it is submitted that successful bidder is required to supply the auto tipper diesel within a period of 90 days from the date of awarding of the contract. Further, it is submitted that respondent No.3 is the successful bidder and has already supplied the auto tipper diesel in pursuance of the tender notification at Annexures-C and D.

¶26

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the completion of the process and supply of the goods tendered, the prayer of the petitioner does not survive for consideration. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved he is at liberty to file appeal under Section 16 of the

¶27

¶28

Karnataka Transparency In Public Procurements Act, 1999.

¶29

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

pgg

Acetec Motors Pvt. Ltd. v. the Secretary to Govt. of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Acetec Motors Pvt. Ltd. v. the Secretary to Govt. 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

Smt Bindu R Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Mrs. Hajra Moin Sait @ Mrs. Hajra Maaz Kapadia Vs Mrs. Rizwana Malik Kapadia

Chandrashekharayya Nagayya Wadeyar Vs the Principal Secretary

B J Shivaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Laxmi Ammakka Poojarti Vs Sri Ganesh Devadiga

Acetec Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Principal Secretary