Sri Shakti Trading Company Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri Shakti Trading Company Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the tender issued by respondent No.3 dated 25.07.2024 (Annexure-B) is liable to be quashed on the ground that the tender process violated Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and Section 22 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999, having not been completed within 90 days nor extended only in exceptional circumstances. +1 more

Court's answer

The issue raised in the petition is substantially answered by the coordinate bench judgment in M/s. Shiv Shakti Dal Industries vs. State of Karnataka (Writ Petition No.202094/2024, MANU/KA/4126/2024), which exhaustively considered the contentions regarding floating of tender by the tender issuing authority and the alleged violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Ratio / Principle

The Judge agreed with the learned AGA that the issue in the matter is covered by the judgment of the coordinate bench of this Court in Shiv Shakti Dal Industries, and accordingly dismissed the petition.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Tender - challenge to tender issued by the District Officer, Department for Welfare of Backward Classes, Shivamogga (No. BCWD/A6/TENDER/2324/CR-38/2022-23 dated 25-07-2024, KPPP Portal No. BCWD/2024-25/IND0110) - writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking certiorari to quash the tender and mandamus for fresh tenders per Circular No.FD 685 EXP-12/2021 dated 29/11/2021 - petitioners alleged violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and Section 22 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999 (tender process to be completed within 90 days, extendable only in exceptional circumstances) - State objected on grounds of alternative efficacious remedy under Section 16 of the said Act, suppression of material facts, and non-intervention in the domain of the tender issuing authority - HELD: the issue raised is substantially answered by the coordinate bench judgment in M/s. Shiv Shakti Dal Industries vs. State of Karnataka, W.P. No.202094/2024 (MANU/KA/4126/2024); the matter is covered thereby - Petition dismissed.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JUNE 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

WRIT PETITION NO. 100938 OF 2025 (GM-TEN)

BETWEEN:

SRI. SHAKTI TRADING COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,

SRI. GAJANAN HABIB,

S/O. PANDURANGSA PRAASHURAMSA HABIB, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, PLOT NO.C-30, APMC MARKET YARD, AMARGOL, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580025.

SRI. RAMAPPA DHARMAPPA SRI. VEERABHADRESHWARA TRADERS

#1, SORABA MAIN ROAD, SORABA, KARNATAKA.

SMT. ASHWINI.

SAI TRADERS-BELURU, POST BELURU, SAGARA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 17.06.2025.

(BY SRI. S.S. CHALAWADI & SRI. V.R. SARATHY, ADVOCATES FOR P1; SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL &

…PETITIONERS

SRI. LINGESH V. KATTEMANE, ADVOCATES FOR P2 & P3)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT FOR WELFARE OF BACKWARD CLASSES, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM TENDER, ACCEPTING AUTHORITY, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

THE DISTRICT OFFICER, DEPARTMENT FOR WELFARE OF BACKWARD CLASSES, BASAVA CHETHANA NILAYA, 100 FT ROAD, RAVINDRA NAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA-577204.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

A. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASH TENDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 BEARING NO:BCWD/A6/TENDER/2324/CR-38/2022-23 DATED 25-07-2024, KPPP PORTALNO.BCWD/2024-25/IND0110(ANNEXURE-B) IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

B. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE FRESH TENDERS BY FOLLOWING THE TIMELINE AS FIXED BY THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO.FD 685 EXP-12/2021 DATED 29/11/2021 IN THE ALL THE TENDERS TO BE ISSUED. (ANNEXURE-C) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

The present petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the tender issued by the 3^rd respondent dated 25.07.2024 vide Annexure-B and for issuance of the writ of mandamus directing respondents to issue fresh tenders by following the timeline as fixed by the Circular dated 29.11.2021 in the tenders to be issued.

Petitioners are in the business of supply of food materials, cereals, etc, for the past several years and supplying to several departments at the competitive rates. On a tender being floated by respondent No.1 from various suppliers like that of the petitioners throughout the State, tender was called for each Taluka. The petitioners applied for the said tender floated by the 1^st respondent.

It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that respondents have committed blatant violation of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

Constitution of India and have given a go-by to Section 22 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999 and that the tender process ought to have been completed within a period of 90 days and got extended only in exceptional circumstances, which is no done in the present case. Therefore, learned counsel for petitioners seeks indulgence of this Court to allow his petition and quash the tender process issued by respondent No.3 insofar as petitioners are concerned.

Per Contra, the learned AGA representing

respondent/State submits that petition itself is not maintainable on the ground that there is an alternative efficacious remedy available under Section 16 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999, the appeal would lie to the appellate authority, secondly, on the ground of suppression of material facts and thirdly,

on the ground that floating or calling for tender or modification of the tender is within the domain of the tender issuing authority and this Court cannot intervene in

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

the course of judicial review thereby nullifying the action

of the tender issuing authority/State.

Learned AGA relies upon a reported Judgment passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in Writ Petition no.202094/2024 in the case of M/s. Shiv Shakti Dal Industries vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in MANU/KA/4126/2024 to contend that the subject matter of the writ petition is being decided exhaustively in the said reported Judgment, which has been subsequently followed by this Court in several other Judgments. Hence, he seeks for dismissal of the petition.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for respondent/State. Having perused the petition papers and judgment in the case of Shiv Shakti Dal Industries mentioned supra, it is apparently seen that in the aforesaid case, this Court has exhaustively considered all the contentions with regard to floating of tender by tender issuing authority. The issue of

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7752 WP No. 100938 of 2025

HC-KAR

violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and whether there is any illegality or infirmity of the tender or its process requiring interference at the hands of this Court. After carefully going through the said Judgment in the case of Shiv Shakti Dal Industries, this Court is of the opinion that issue raised in this petition is substantially answered in the judgment herein stated supra. Under the circumstances, I am in agreement with the learned AGA that the issue in this matter is covered by the Judgment of coordinate bench of this Court in the case of case Shiv Shakti Dal Industries. Accordingly, I pass the following :

ORDER

Petition is dismissed.

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

CKK CT-MCK

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71