A private company challenged an outsourced manpower tender by the Social Welfare Department, contending it violated departmental circulars. The court noted an e-corrigendum permitting individual proprietorships, that the petitioner did not participate in the amended tender process, and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH WRIT PETITION NO. 104813 OF 2024 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
IN BEEHUT PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.2, NO.426, 8TH MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR, BANASWADI, BANGALORE-560 043, REPRESENTED BY IT’S DIRECTOR, SHARANABASAVA S/O. SANGAPPA PURAD, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BALAGOUDA A. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SAROJA HANGARAKI
Location: HIGH COURT OF KARANTAKA DHARWAD BENCH
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. RAJENDRASWAMY HOSAMATH, ADV. FOR R2)
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 WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND QUASH TENDER BEARING NO.JDSWD-D/S-2/OUTSOURCE MAN POWER TENDER/CR-3/2024-25, DATED 19/07/2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-B TO THE WRIT PETITION; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CALL FOR A FRESH TENDER BY FOLLOWING ALL THE CIRCULARS OF THE LABOUR DEPARTMENT, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND ETC.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:12846 WP No. 104813 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)
the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1.
a writ of certiorari or any other writ of like nature and
quash tender bearing No.JDSWD-D/S-2/Outsource Man Power Tender/CR-3/2024-25, dated 19/07/2024 issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-B to the writ petition and issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ of like nature and direct the respondent No.2 to call for a fresh tender by following all the circulars of the Labour Department, Social Welfare Department and Finance Department and etc.
issued by the Departments but they have failed to follow the same and also contend that circular dated 01.09.2022 at Annexure-C clearly states that the contractors/outsource organizations should not have faced any penalty and/or criminal case for violating labour laws. This condition strictly mentioned in the tender document but it is missing in all the tenders including the model tender document and therefore the impugned tenders have to be quashed and a direction to call the fresh tender is to be issued.
Advocate submits that it is not in dispute that tender was
called as per Annexure-B and also a request was given by the petitioner and even E-corrigendum was issued on 16.08.2024 and even amended the tender that ‘tender shall be either a Company, Firm, Individual proprietorship, Non-governmental Organization who are registered under law, Co-operative society who are registered under the Society Act’ though it is earlier mentioned as ‘Societies Registration Act/Company Act/Co-operative Societies Act’. In spite of giving an opportunity to them, this petitioner has not participated in the tender. Even after the amendment also, the date is given till 22.08.2024 and in spite of it, he did not apply. Hence, he has no locus before this Court to question the very tender process.
even time was also given and the said pre-bid was also held on 29.07.2024. When the corrigendum was also
issued by making the amendment and in spite of it also an opportunity is given, he did not participate and hence the question of quashing the tender notification does not arise.
grievance of the petitioner is that no proprietorship concern was permitted to participate in the said tender and even after modification also, the petitioner has not participated and even applied for tender.
ORDER
Petition is dismissed.
Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the outsourcing tender issued by respondent No.2 violated departmental circulars and should be quashed.
Whether a non-participating bidder can challenge a tender after an e-corrigendum permitted individual proprietorships to participate.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
In Beehut Private Limited
State of Karnataka
Saroja Hangaraki
The Joint Director, Social Welfare Department, Dharwad
H.P.Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
