Petitioner sought writ of mandamus to confirm him as successful bidder after tender concluded. Court dismissed petition on grounds of laches as works were already complete when petition filed and interim order granted.
Writ petition dismissed on grounds of laches; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.(MD) No.16489 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :21.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P.(MD)No.16489 of 2023 and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.13787 and 24705 of 2023
Narayanan
... Petitioner
Vs.
Page 1 of 5
W.P.(MD) No.16489 of 2023
Kaladithidal Panchayat, Ilayangudi, Sivagangai District.
6.S.Anbarasu
7.Tamilarasu
... Respondents
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 confirming the petitioner as successful bidder as per notification on 25.05.2023 and subsequently issue work order and estimate copy thereby restraining the 6th respondent not to conduct any work without further orders.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sebastinal Preethi For R1 to R4 : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate
For R6 : Mr.V.Karthick Raja for M/S.Ajmal Associates
O R D E R
Heard both sides.
2.The petitioner no doubt was the lowest bidder. Though the
petitioner has a good case, the writ petition suffers from the vice of laches.
Page 2 of 5
W.P.(MD) No.16489 of 2023
The tender process was concluded on 31.05.2023. The writ petition came to be filed only on 05.07.2023. Even when the interim order was granted on 07.07.2023, the learned Special Government Pleader informed the Court that the works have been completed. The question of entertaining the writ petition after completion of works does not arise at all. In any event, the private respondents cannot be blamed. The person, who had completed the work, is entitled to be paid. Therefore, on the ground of laches, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
21.12.2023
NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No
mm
To
Page 3 of 5
W.P.(MD) No.16489 of 2023
3.The Assistant Director, (Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, O/o. Collectorate, Sivagangai District.
Page 4 of 5
W.P.(MD) No.16489 of 2023
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
mm
W.P.(MD)No.16489 of 2023
21.12.2023
Page 5 of 5
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition for confirmation of successful bidder filed after the work has been completed.
Whether the writ petition is barred by the doctrine of laches due to delay in filing and delay between enquiry conclusion and filing.
Whether the County Court should grant relief despite the petitioner being the lowest bidder.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Narayanan
The District Collector
The Plan Director
The Assistant Director
The Block Development Officer
Kaladithidal Panchayat
G.R. Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
