Petitioners challenged the eligibility of non-district poultry farmers for an egg supply tender. Counsel submitted the cause does not survive for adjudication. The High Court dismissed the writ petition and stay application as infructuous.
Writ petition and stay application dismissed as infructuous.
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.
[3303 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 18192 OF 2018
Between:
AND
I
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the Respondent No.2 to declare that the unofficial respondents Nos.s to 9 are not eligible to participate in the e-procurement tender dated 17-05-2018 for supply of eggs in all ICDS Projects andprovide eggs for 30 days in a month for all children from 7 months to 6years of age in all Anganwadi Centers situated in Mahabubnagar District as they are not hails from Mahabubnagar District.
lA NO:1OF 2018
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased to stay of opening of e-procurement tender notice in file No.07iA2 /DPC/2018 dated 17-05-2018 issued by Respondent No.2 till disposal of main writpetition.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. MADHUSUDAN REDDY GAVINOLLA
Counsel for the Respondent No. I to 3: GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE(TG)
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: cP FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respondent No.S to 9: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No. 18192 of 2Ol8
ORDER:
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel forthe petitioners fairly submit that the cause in the writpetition does not survive for adjudication.
In view of the above submission, this writ petition is dismissedas infructuous.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall standclosed.
\
"'''133iUffffHESlllHiA //TRUE coPY/'
sEinb-N oFFtcER
To,
i i?'l:33Ji""6ye?T#ifl":rir';3"","f +ffi ;;; iJ cFtor.womenD'evelopment '1i"s0ii"t!iEl"l,'-l'iil9ill...^childWelfare'Highcourtfor the " siaie ot telangana [OUT]
TJ BS
I I I I
HIGH COURT
DATED:07102t2023
ORDER
1{,
v
<br>Q:
i)
-:J l)Ic'
i-r:
sJ
a
,:i
WP.No.18192 of 2018
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
& (
o*( p9
M Y
* \qt\vz
I
o*( p9
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking direction to exclude certain poultry farms from a tender survives for adjudication.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Prasanth Poultry Farm and others
The State of Telangana
The Women Development and Child Welfare Department
Justicesgrenivas Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
