In a public interest litigation concerning an enhanced rate for eggs supplied to Anganwadi centres, the court found the contract had expired and no need to proceed, disposing of the petition without costs.
Interpretation of contract expiration and enhancement of rates as reason to dismiss PIL.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY. THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO: 195 OF 2012
Between
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiaprayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleasedto issue a writ or directionparticularly one in thenature ofMandamus decladng that the action of the Officialrespondents enhancing the Eggrate conlraryto the Terms and Conditions and without approval of DistrictPurchase Committee(DPC), Nalgonda is arbitrary and illegal and consequentlyissuea directionto theOfficial Respondents to recover the enhancedrate paid to theRespondent No.5already contrary to the Terms and Conditions.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(PlLMP. NO: 238 OF 2012)
Petition under Section 15'1 CPCpraying that in thecircumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHighCourt maybe pleasedto issuea direction to lhe Respondents No.2 and 3not topay theenhanced rateof Rs.3=00 paise which rate is over and above the rate to be determined asper the terms and conditions which is always below Rs.3=00paise pending disposal of the Public lnterest Litigation in the interest ofjustice.
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRLM RAMARAO
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4:
GP FOR WOMEN DEV ANO CHILO WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI.K.RAMREDDY
The Court made the following ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SIIAR]ITA AND
THE Ho BLE SRI JUSTICD ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.195 of 2OL2
QEDEE: PertheHon'blethe ChiefJusticaSatishChandra Shanna)
The present public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioners in the year 2012 stating that enhanced rate in the matter of purchase of eggs as nutritional food to the Anganwadi Centres was paid to the respondent No.5.
The respondents have filed counter affidavits in the matter and it has bcen stated therein that the rate of the eggs was increased on account of escalation of petrol/diesel charges, which was paid by the contractor and in those circumstances, the rate of the eggs was enhanced to Rs.3.50 each, including transportation charges. The other important aspect of the matter is that the contract was for a period of one year only and thesame isover.
In the light of the counter affidavits filed by the respondents, this Court does not find any reason to proceed further in the present public interest litigation.
The public interest litigation stands disposed of accordingly.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as tocosts.
SD/-K.SAILESHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
i/TRUE COPY'
SECTION OFFICER
To
SA SW ).-\X
HIGH COURT
DATEOiI'l10212022
OROER
PlL.No.'t 95 of 2012
1 $E sTA I€
( o
't
0 5 t'lAR 2S2 .-) l
:,/
* .,
-:.:*i_#.?
DISPOSING OF THE P.I.L
WITHOUT COSTS.
Gc)
r__z r -r i,_
^,.\3"..
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to issue a writ of mandamus to declare the enhancement of egg rate arbitrary and illegal.
Whether to direct respondents not to pay the enhanced rate pending disposal of the PIL.
Kavali Venkataiah
Nutikurthi Srinivas
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Arham Enterprises
Satish Chandra Sharma
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
