M/s.Njr Constructions Private Limited Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

M/s.Njr Constructions Private Limited Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

[³³⁰⁰ I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITION NO: 22578 OF 2025

Between:

M/s.NJR Constructions Private Limited, Rep. by Nerella Janardana^Rao,S/o, Nerella Narayana, aged 67 years, Occ Managing Direcor NJR Constructions, Fi/o.Plot No 106/4 to 5, IMoti Nagar^{Near Seven HillsHigh} School, Balanagar, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District.

...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Telangana, represented by its Secretary, Department of Health, Medical and Family Welfare, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2 Telangana Medical Services and lnfrastructure Development Corporation, rep. by its Managing Director, Koti Womens College, Kacheguda, Hyderabad

3 The Chief Engineer, Telangana Medical Services and lnfrastructure Development Corporation, Koti Womens College, Kacheguda, Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^{praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^High Court^maybe pleased to issue a.Writ, direction or order one more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent^Nos.2and 3ⁱⁿ disqualifying the Petitioners bid with respect to Tender Notice^No.6- 3/TGIMSIDC/Tec|2O25-26 dated 1 1 .06.2025 for construction of a 100 bedded sub-district hospital at Ktikatpally in the^{pre-qualification} stage on^{the ground that} the bidder has furnished wrgng disclosure about litigation^{history despite having} cases filed at Honourable High Court of Telangana, hence the^{bid may rejected as} complaint raised by fellow bidder without verifying the^{fact, withoutseekingany} clarification from the Petitioner or issuing any show-cause^{notice to the Petitioner} as illegal, arbitrary, high handed, in violation of rights^{guaranteed to the Petitioner} under Article^'14 of the Constitution of lndia with a consequential^{direction to set} aside the action of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in disqualifying^{the Petitioneron} the aforementioned ground and direct the Respondent Nos.2 and^{3 to consider the} Petitioners bid for construction of 100 bedded sub-district^{hospitalat Kukatpally,} Hyderabad called-forth by the Respondent No.2 vide^{Tender NoticeNo.6-} 3/TG MS I DCiTe chl 2025-26 1¹ .06.2025 in accord ance^{with law}

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 Respondent No.2 and 3 to considering the bid of ther Petitioners bid vide Tender lD No. 609176 in Tender Notice No.6-3/TGMSIDC/Techl2025-26 for construction of a 100 bedded sub-district hospital at Kukatpally without reference to alleged disq ualificatio n the bidder has furnished wrcng disclosure about litigation history despite having cases filed at Honourable High Court of Telangana, hence the bid may rejected as complaint raised by fellow bidder

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

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 stay all further proceedings pertaining to Tender Notice No.6-3/TGMSlDCiTech/202526 11.06.2025 for construction of a 100 bedded sub-district hospital at Kukatpally pending disposal of the above writ petition

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. ZAINAB REPRESENTING FOR SRI. V MURALI MANOHAR

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2&3: SRI RAMA RAO GANTANNAGARI (SC FOR TMrDC)

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITION No.2257a oF 2025

ORDER:

When the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms.Zainab, learned counsel representing Mr V.Murali Monohar, learned counsel for petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Petition with a liberty to file a fresh application.

Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, liberty was given to the petitioner to file a fresh application, if necessary. There sha_ll be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if aly, shall stand

clo sed. SD/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSIS NT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 One CC to SRt. V MURAL 2 one cc,o sRr RAMA i$[,fr^:l:::::::?,,,c) 3 ropuc] Iyffi!|j:r3,irioR^{MEDTCALHenLru} rw ,)r]s'h';o,,t ro,. tnu stare of

4 f,wo^CDCopies KKS totu PVL )l-

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10812025

-.:'.=
S; i4 I
a',. (. <br>)t\
'. ii
,. 1
0E sEP 2ffi
,' tij
Ji

ORDER

WP.No.22578 of 2025

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

&?,(