Disposed

Sri Shankarappa M v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jul 2024WP/16917/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a BBMP tender notification dated 06.06.2024 alleging illegality under the Act's Sections 6 and 10. Respondents submitted that the tender notification had been recalled/withdrawn; nothing survived and the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to pursue remedies later if occasion arose.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition disposed after respondents withdrew/recalled the impugned tender notification, liberty reserved to petitioner.

Sri Shankarappa M Vs State of Karnataka — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:26367 WP No. 16917 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 16917 OF 2024 (GM-TEN)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. SHANKARAPPA M, S/O LATE MAYA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.32, NISARGA ROAD, MUNESHWARA NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 091.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SANGEETA SANGANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FORESTS ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 001.

¶14

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BBMP, N.R. SQUARE, BBMP HEAD OFFICE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 002.

¶15

RANGE FOREST OFFICER, YELAHANKA ZONE, RANGE FOREST OFFICE, BBMP, YELAHANKA ZONE, NEAR YELAHANKA OLD TOWN, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 064.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:26367 WP No. 16917 of 2024

¶18

ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, SUB DIVISION 1, BBMP OFFICE SUB DIVISION 1, BBMP OFFICE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 002.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1; SRI. B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 ND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 06.06.2024 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AS BEING ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, AND IN VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 6 AND 10 OF THE ACT AND ETC.,

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

In this petition, petitioner is seeking for the following

¶25

reliefs:

¶26

" a. Quash the notification dated

¶27

06.06.2024 vide bearing No. G.C.¸ÀA./mÉAqÀgï/¦gï/ 2/2024-25 and all further proceedings issued by the Respondent as being illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Sections 6 and 10 of the Act.

¶28

b. Issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.2 to initiate a fresh tender process that adheres to the principles of transparency, fairness, and equality as mandated by the Constitution of India.

¶29

c. Order a comprehensive investigation into the tender process to identify and rectify any irregularities or malpractices.

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:26367 WP No. 16917 of 2024

¶31

d. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity."

¶32

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶33

AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶34

Learned Counsel for respondent No.2-BBMP submits

¶35

that the impugned tender notification dated 06.06.2024 at Annexure-B has been recalled/withdrawn by the respondents.

¶36

The said submission is placed on record.

¶37

Nothing further survives for the petition and the same

¶38

is accordingly disposed of .

¶39

Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to take

¶40

recourse to such remedies as available in law including approaching this Court subsequently, if the occassion arises.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2 CT: BHK

Sri Shankarappa M v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Shankarappa M 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paralympic Committee of India Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Lakshmana Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Shivaraju T S Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Rabbani Vs State by Principal

Sri Barkat Pasha Vs State of Karnataka

Ms Keerthana Vs the State of Karnataka