The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a company seeking enforcement of a contract extension represention. The Court held there was no vested right to extend the contract and no infringement of legal or constitutional rights.
The writ petition is dismissed. Writ. No 2750 oF 2023 shall stand closed.
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.
[32s6 ]
HIGH COURT FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTEENTHDAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSANDANDTWENTYTHREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTTCEMUMMINENl SUDHEER KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No 27s0 0F 2023
Between:
M/s lndia Traders,Representedby its Partner Mr Mohd Zakir,S/o. Mohd Jiffei Having officeat lst Floor Sherza Estate, 5-3-989, NizamShai Road Hyderabad-195.
,..PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 ot theConstitutionof lndia prayingthat in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or directionmore particularlyone in the nature of writ of Mandamus or anyother appropriate directionor relief directing the respondents to considerthe requestletter of the petitioner for extending the contract for oneyear i.e.,2O22-2023.
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under SectionI 51 CPCprayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support ofthe petition, the High Court may be pleasedto direct the respondent not topublished or call for new tender till the respondentconsider and pass any orders on therepresentationof petitionerfor the extensionof the contract for theyear 2022-2023.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRIMURLI NARAYAN BUNG Counsel for the Respondents:SRI B.MAYUR REDDY, SC FORJNTUH
The Court made the following:ORDER
THE HON'BI,E SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.275O of 2o23
ORDER
Hearci learned r:or utscl for the petitioner and Sri B. Mayur Reddy, learncrl Standing Counsel appearing for the responden ts.
the saicl reprcsentation,dated 09.O2.2022' the petilioner approached thisCourt by tiiing the pt esent writ pe tition c,omplaininginactionon lhc parl of the respondents in tlot considering therepresentation, dated 09 'O'2 '2022 'subrllitted bv the cct.rtloner.
agreement pcriod and lhr're is no infringement ol lcgal or constitutional right ol thc 1-rctiIioner, this Court docs not find
an1; meril in tltis writ pcLit:r,r'i
be no order as to costs
Miscella:eeous Petitirrns, if any, per-rding irr thisWrit
Petition shall stand closed
SD/.N. SRIHARI ASSISTAN,IREGISTRAR
/ffRUECOPY//
sE(dPIoNoFFtcER
To 1. one CC to SRI MURLI NARAYAN BUNG' 4dYo.99!9 LqP-9.qI i- il; dd i; Siiie.MnvuR ntDDY,sc FoR JNrUH [oPUC]
PSK. BS/ a/
t
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 410612023
ORDER
WP.No.2750 of 2023
1\ rE SlATE oA
C)
oo 1$ Iuttill .?s>
I
..,{ o
--r oE:; IAI
--:rt;'
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.
vq
,)
t)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has a vested right to the extension of the contract.
Whether the petitioner suffers infringement of any legal or constitutional right.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s India Traders
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University
Sudheer Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
