Dismissed

Sri Sai Welfare Association (Sc) Yerraguntla Town, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC27 Nov 2015WP/38602/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a tender notification for sanitation works. The court disposed of the petition, directing the Nagarpanchayat to consider the petitioner's grievance in accordance with relevant Government Orders regarding association allotments.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the petitioner's grievance in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.581 MA, 06.11.1996, and G.O.Ms.No.30 MA, 18.01.2000.

Sri Sai Welfare Association (Sc)… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

Writ Petition No.38602 of 2015

¶3

Dated 2 7 th November, 2015

¶4

Between:

¶5

Sri Sai Welfare Association (SC)

¶6

…Petitioner

¶7

And

¶8

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others

¶9

…Respondents

¶10

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P.Raghavender Reddy

¶11

Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Municipal Administration (AP)

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

ORDER:

¶14

Feeling aggrieved by the tender notification issued in respect of three works pertaining to sanitation and water supply in respondent No.3-Nagarpanchayat, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶15

Sri P.Raghavender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that while his client is not aggrieved by entrustment of works on e-tender basis, as per G.O.Ms.No.581 MA, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (G2) Department, dated 06.11.1996, and G.O.Ms.No.30 MA, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (G2) Department, dated 18.01.2000, the petitionerAssociation is entitled to allotment of some portion of the sanitation work.

¶16

Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4, on instructions, submitted that the writ petition is based on mere apprehension and that respondent No.3 is prepared to follow G.O.Ms.No.581 MA, dated 06.11.1996, and G.O.Ms.No.30 MA, dated 18.01.2000, and is in fact proposing to allot 15% of the works to the petitioner-Association.

¶17

In the light of the above facts and the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with the above mentioned GOs.

¶18

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.49689 of 2015 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶19

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶20

27^th November, 2015 VGB

Sri Sai Welfare Association (Sc) Yerraguntla Town, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sai Welfare Association (Sc) Yerraguntla Town, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haribaa, Vs The State of Telangana

S. Suraj Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Abdul Azeez Vs The Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board

Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

J.L. Narasimham, Mumbai and Another Vs M. Raghunandan Rao, Hyd

Kavali Omkar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh