Disposed

Mr. a. R. Laakshman Sastry v. Government E Marketplace (Gem)

Karnataka HC31 Oct 2022WP/20175/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to change the category of his product on the Government e Marketplace. The court directed the petitioner to furnish additional details and documents sought by the respondents within three weeks before the matter is reconsidered.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to furnish sought details and documents within three weeks.

Mr. a. R. Laakshman Sastry Vs Government E… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 20175 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 20175 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. A.R. LAAKSHMAN SASTRY S/O. MR. A.L.R. SASTRY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. ORNATE NATURALE, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.9/4, "ORNATE HOUSE", MUSEUM ROAD, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT. ANISHA A. AATRESH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

GOVERNMENT E MARKETPLACE (GeM) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UNION OF INDIA, SECOND FLOOR, JEEVAN TARA BUILDING, JANPATH, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI-110 001, THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶14

UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, RASHTRAPATI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 004, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. ANUPARNA BORDOLOI, ADVOCATE)

¶17

¶18

WP No. 20175 of 2022

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 28.05.2021 AT ANNEXURE-G AND CHANGE THE CATEGORY OF THE PETITIONER'S PRODUCT ADVANCED FUEL FREE SOLID WASTE DISPOSER FROM 'SANITARY NAPKINS INCINERATOR WITH SMOKE CONTROL UNIT' BY ADDING A NEW CATEGORY RELEVANT TO THE PETITIONERS PRODUCT AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard Smt. Anisha A. Aartesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Anuparna Bordoloi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶23

The petitioner seeks for a direction by issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing consideration of the petitioner's representation dated 28.05.2021 for change of category of the petitioner's product 'Advanced Fuel Free Solid Waste Disposer' from 'Sanitary Napkins Incinerator with Smoke

¶24

¶25

WP No. 20175 of 2022

¶26

Control Unit' by adding a new category, which is relevant to the petitioner's product.

¶27

3. The petitioner submitted a representation on

¶28

28.05.2021 for the aforesaid purpose. The respondents have replied to the petitioner's representation, by seeking certain details and documents, which read as follows:-

¶29

"However, we would be needing more

¶30

information for further action.

¶31

1. Contact Details of 3 Prospective Government Buyers.

¶32

2. Annual sale of respective product category.

¶33

3. How many quantities of products Buyers are planning to procure in current financial year?

¶34

4. Price of the product.

¶35

5. Is Buyer requirement one time or recurring?

¶36

6. Copy of past Purchase orders, past tender orders in which you have participated.

¶37

Contact details of 4-5 Competitors OEMs/Sellers.

¶38

Technical specification of product, OEMs catalogue."

¶39

¶40

WP No. 20175 of 2022

¶41

It is also indicated that once the documents would

¶42

come about, it would be placed before the Committee and based on Committee's approval, appropriate orders would be passed. Therefore, furnishing of documents was imperative for the placement of the request of the petitioner before the Committee. Since these documents are yet to be furnished by the petitioner to the hands of the respondents, I deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to furnish all the details that are sought for, by the respondents in terms of the Electronic Mail dated 28.05.2021. The petitioner shall furnish all that is sought for, by the respondents, in the next three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event, the petitioner furnishes all the necessary documents, the respondents would in six weeks thereafter, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

¶43

With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Mr. a. R. Laakshman Sastry v. Government E Marketplace (Gem)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. a. R. Laakshman Sastry v. Government E Marketplace (Gem)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri D Venkatesh Murthy Vs the District Registrar of Societies

K. Rajesh Vs State of Karnataka

Parikshith@ Pareekshith @ Pachu @ Parikshith Bhandary Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Sikandar Babu Vs the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf

Sri Marikamba Vyavasthapaka Samithi R Vs the State of Karnataka

Banagopal H S Vs the Bangalore City Co. Oeprative Bank Ltd.