Disposed

M/s. Jahnavi Enterprises, v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Telangana HC17 Mar 2010WP/6025/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of a writ petition challenging a tender notice for guest house maintenance work. The court accepted the respondent's submission to allow the petitioner to continue pending contract finalization, rendering the petition infructuous. The writ petition and interim relief application were disposed accordingly.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/s. Jahnavi Enterprises, Vs Jawaharlal… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶5

Writ Petition No.6025 of 2010

¶6

Between:

¶7

M/s.Jahnavi Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietor V.Vara Prasad

¶8

..... Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kukatpally, Hyderabad Rep. by its Registrar.

¶11

.....Respondent

¶12

Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.O.Manoher Reddy

¶13

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.K.Rathangapani Reddy, SC for JNTU

¶14

The Court made the following:

¶15

Order:

¶16

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare tender notice, dated 06-03-2010, published in newspapers on 08-03-2010, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶17

The petitioner was awarded with the work of maintenance of guest house of the respondent for a period of one year vide proceedings, dated 31-012005. Later, the petitioner was continued without any proceedings in writing. In addition to continuing the said contract, the petitioner was also entrusted with additional work of maintenance of second floor of the said guest house vide proceedings, dated 16-09-2006, ‘until further orders’. Without passing any order of termination, the respondent issued tender notice, dated 06-03-2010, for entrustment of various works including the work pertaining to providing housekeeping services in the guest house. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has not given it reasonable time in order to settle with its employees, who were involved in maintenance of the said guest house.

¶18

At the hearing, Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, fairly stated that since the date for commencement of fresh contract in pursuance of the impugned tender notice has not been fixed, the respondent will permit the petitioner to continue up to 31^st May, 2010, and that the fresh contract to be finalized in pursuance of the impugned tender notice, will be commenced from 1^st June, 2010.

¶19

This submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent is placed on record and the Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶20

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.7758 of 2010, filed by the petitioner for

¶21

interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.

¶22

___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 17^th March, 2010

¶23

lur

M/s. Jahnavi Enterprises, v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/s. Jahnavi Enterprises, v. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cheruku Ranga Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Chetti Komuraiah, Vs The Station House Officer/Sub-Inspector of Police

Chintham Reddy Shekar Reddy Sekhar Reddy, Vs The Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Limited

Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissoner, Enforcement

Dogga v. George Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

The Toddy Cooperative Society, Group-Viii, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its