The High Court held that the relief sought in the writ petition regarding the non-selection of the petitioner's tender became infructuous. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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.
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :18.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
M/s.Valar & Co. Represented by its Managing Partner Sadayampalayam Konasamudram Post Konganapuram (Via) Edappady Taluk Salem District 637 102 ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Commissioner Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Chennai
2.The Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) Salem
3.R.Sundararaju The Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) Salem
Page No.1 of 4
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
4.E.R.Venkateswaran
Executive Engineer District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) Salem ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned letter of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1028/2011/A12 dated 08.05.2012 and quash the same so far as the non-selection of the petitioner's tender and direct the 2nd respondent to award contracts and work orders to the petitioner in respect the works covered in (a) Package No.SLM 8/2011-12 in Nagavalli Panchayat Union in Salem District under 13th Finance Commission 2011 – 12 (b) Package No.SLM 11/2011-12 in Edappady Panchayat Union in Salem District under 13th Finance Commission 2011-12 and (c) Package No.SLM 12/2011-12 in Konganapuram Panchayat Union in Salem District under 13th Finance Commission 2011-12 by accepting the petitioner's tenders submitted in two cover system.
For Petitioner : Ms.P.Kasthuri for Vijayanatarajan For Respondents : Mr.P.Sathish AGP for R1 & R2 R3 & R4 - No Appearance
O R D E R
Page No.2 of 4
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
When the matter is taken up today for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relief sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the bundle.
2.In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as infructous. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition if any, stands closed. No costs.
18.11.2022
kas Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking / Non speaking order To
1.The Commissioner The Government of Tamilnadu Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Chennai
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Page No.3 of 4
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
2.The Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) Salem
kas
W.P.No.15256 of 2012
18.11.2022
Page No.4 of 4
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Valar & Co.
The Government of Tamilnadu
The Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) Salem
R. Sundararaju
E. R. Venkateswaran
N. SATHISH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
