The High Court of Telangana dismissed the writ petition filed by Sri Vijaya Scientifies as infructuous on the submission that the cause did not survive, without commenting on substantive claims.
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.
t3300 l
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FTRST DAY OF T.IOVEI/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 29693 OF 2011
Between:
Sri Vijaya Scientifies, Rep by its Prop. V.Balaji S/o. V.Bhaskar Rao, Aged about 45 years, Occ: Business, No.36,.1st floor, Raghavendra Towers, Chirag -Ali-Lane' Abids' Hvderabad
...pETrroNER
AND
...RES'.NDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring letter in PO.No.1 9/646/HMHIDC/EQU/EFlSElEDlBl 120102011,6871D daled 4.11.2O11 of the 1st respondent in accepting the bid of the 3rd respondent and set aside the same as highly illegal, arbitrary, as it is contrary to clause 3 and 7 of section 1 of the tender schedule and further declare that the petitioner is entitled to get his bid approved for supplying the equipments as per tender Notice No.6.'1IAPHMHIDC/ProcuremenUZO11 -1 2 daled1 2.9.2011.
l.A. NO:2 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 36777 OF 2011)
Petition under Section 1 51 CPCpraying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHigh Courtmay be pleased to suspend the operation of the letter in PO.No.19/646/HI!'lHlDC/EQU/EFlSElEDlB11201-2011, 6BllD, dated 4.11.2011 of
the 1st respondent in accepting thebid of the 3rd respondent pending disposalof the main writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G.SEENAKUMAR counsel for the Respondent No.1: sRlP.V.A.PADMANABHAM Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GPFOR MEDHEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent No.3:..
The Court made the following: ORDER
tll
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO.29693 of 2OLI
ORDER:
Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive.
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall
stand closed.
SD/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANTREGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To
1 One CC to SRI G.SEENA KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 2 One CC to SRI P.V.A.PADMANABHAIV, Advocate [OPUC] 3 Two CCs to GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAIVILY WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] 4 Two CD Copies PSK. 9.BS
HIGH COURT
DATED:21 11112023
ORDER
WP.No.29693 of 2011
a
1 LLA
'o(
I
.-Y ^<br>li 0) c
.!) arJ ;l-_-r
\a ,o il
a
J ll 9
{g
DISMISS!NG THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS. ..y
Sri Vijaya Scientifies
The Managing Director, A.P. Health & Medical Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation
Government of A.P.
M/s.Chintamani Paramani Enterprises
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
