Writ petition challenging tender notification for refusal of first preference status dismissed as infructuous because the license granted to petitioners expired on 31.01.2016.
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 (Special Original J urisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION NO:1510 OF 2016
Between:
AND
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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direttion declaring the action of the respondents in not giving first preference to the petitioners in the tender notification No.ESl122(1\12016-RM-KR, dt.4,.1 .2016 as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequen y direct the respondents lo give first preference to the petitioners on fair commercial terms as mentioned in the Board Resolution No.133/2007. dt.24.1O.2OOT.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 1898 OF 2016)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to give first preference to the petitioners on fair commercial terms as per Resolution No.133/2007, dt.24.10.2OO7 in the tender notification No.Esl122(1)12016-RM:KR, dt.4.1 .2O16, pending disposal of the WP
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRl. M BHUSHAN REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: A RAVI BABU (SC FOR TSRTC)
The Court made the following: ORDER
//
I
I I
HON'BLE MRS JUSTTCE SUREPALLI NAhIDA
WRIT P TITION No .1s10 0F 2016
ORDER:
Heard Sri M, Bhushan Reddy. learnecl counsel appearing on behalf of the petitaoners and Sri A. Ravi Babu, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
2, The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
\
' ...to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not giving first preference to the petitioners in the Tender Notification No. E5/t22(1)/2016-RM:KR dr 4-1,-20L6 as iilegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequently direct the respondents to give first preference to the petitioners on fair commercial terms as mentioned in the Board Resolution No.133/2007, dated 24-tO2007 and pass....".
l
Wl, ll l0 l016
adjudication any more since the deed of license given to the petitioners on 03.01.2011 for a period of five years, expired by 31.01.2016 itself and the petitioners do not have any existing right to challenge the present impugned notification nor the petitioners had obtained any interim orders in favour of the petitioners since the year 2016.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions , if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
To,
SD/. N.SRIHARI ASSISTAN REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC N OFFICER
NS
q ,[-
HIGH COURT
DATED:1810912024
ORDER
WP.No.1510 of 2016
1 v{E S f4
? e
(
o 17 0E[ 2112,1 (
E-- T {-'
DISMISSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (+
12, >-r1 4 / 64rl-5
Stambam Khadi Ramesh & Ors.
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
Surepalli Nanda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
