Disposed¶27

Manoharan v. The District Collector

Madras HC28 Jan 2025WP(MD)/954/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Village panchayat tender cancellation; Certiorarified Mandamus; Article 226; Sivandhinathapuram Village Panchayat; Lalgudi; Trichy; tender notification 06.12.2024 cancelled by order dated 30.12.2024; successful bidder declaration refused; EMI refund undertaking; writ petition disposed without adjudication; liberty to participate in fresh tender; Manoharan v. District Collector Trichirapalli; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; L. Victoria Gowri J.; 28.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Neither the prayed-for quashing nor declaration as successful bidder was granted; the writ petition was disposed of on recording the respondents' counsel's submission, with liberty to the petitioner to participate in the event of issuance of a fresh tender notification. ¶27

Manoharan Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.954 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 28.01.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.954 of 2025

Manoharan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Trichirapalli.

¶11

The Assistant Director (Panchayats), Collectorate, Trichirappalli.

¶12

The Block Development Officer, Lalgudi Union, Lalgudi, Trichy District.

¶13

The President, Sivandhinathapuram Village Panchayat, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 4^th respondent with related to tender process in Na.Ka.No. 2/2024/Sevandhinathan Uoratchi dated 30.12.2024 and quash the same as illegal and further direct the respondents to declare the petitioner as successful bidder and award the contract to him.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/4

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.954 of 2025

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.Ajmal Khan (R1 & R2) Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.S.Neduncheliyan Government Advocate Mr.M.Sarangan (R3 & R4) Additional Government Pleader

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.2/2024/Sevandhinathan Uoratchi dated 30.12.2024 passed by the fourth respondent thereby cancelling the tender notification issued on 06.12.2024 by the third respondent, with a consequential direction to the respondents to declare the petitioner as successful bidder and award the contract to him.

¶21

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶22

3. When the matter came up for hearing, Mr.Ajmal Khan, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by the learned Government Advocate

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/4

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.954 of 2025

¶26

appearing for the respondents submitted that the third respondent will issue a notification afresh cancelling the tender notifications dated 06.12.2024 and 30.12.2024 and also undertook that EMI paid by the petitioner and other tenderers would be forthwith returned and therefore, nothing survives in this writ petition for further adjudication.

¶27

4. Recording the submission made by the learned learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to participate in the event of issuance of fresh tender notification.

¶28

28.01.2025

¶29

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Sm

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.954 of 2025

¶32

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶33

¶34