Dismissed¶27

M/s.Kan Enterprises, v. The Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Telangana HC1 Sept 2025WP/25116/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition No. 25116 of 2025, Telangana High Court, decided 01-09-2025 by Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka; dismissed as infructuous, no costs; petitioner-firm (Visakhapatnam) vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas; subject matter: GeM tender for bunker supply of black oil and white oil through tanker barges at Vizag Port, Letter of Acceptance dated 06.06.2025, request to commence 30% of allotted work, representations dated 06.08.2025 and 07.08.2025; invoked Article 226 and Article 19 of the Constitution and Section 151 CPC; no issue decided on merits; no cases cited.

What did the court decide?

None; the Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous with no costs, and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were directed to stand closed. ¶27

M/s.Kan Enterprises, Vs The Indian Oil… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

PE O:2511 202s

¶7

M/".5u!^{Enterprises,a registered.partnership firm,having} its Office at^plot No.92, Sector l, MVp Double Road, Visakhap'atnani 5SOOi7. reoresenled Lv its Managing Partner, Thanukula Roy prak'ash, ion-oi itian,Ii;6 e;;; Prakasham.

¶8

¶9

¶10

1 llg*lryigl^Oil _Corporation Limited,. Rep. by its Authorised Officer, Marketing urvlston, tetangana and Ap Hyderabad.

¶11

' 3U"1,13,i:1Eii,"&tJ"',n:i:'Slt?l^{Ministry or petroreumand NaturarGas,}

¶12

RESPONDENTS

¶13

petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may l be direction, pleased to decrarins,^" issue a Writ ;:Hi;]::.rff of vtanAo^,,- ^- -_^{,T:;iLTill,,;,:;} allowing the petitioner tc commence 30 % of the work allotted pursuant to Letter of Acceptance i..uua ] p ;r} r#[#ix'r^{;Ii T,:#} ;:,:nl white oir throush rrn*.. Io:.-tsunker supplv of Black oit and berthed at rnner r,,-",., ll',1;::JI.:;:::,f;,r" "].^".1";^"ij:"::" Run sea Going vessers representations dated ,. .;;;;; ":;:: ::'::::torase throush^or vizas^porr, despite "-mair)^{as oeing} iresar, arbitrary and in ,"11;it"'i, |]::ii:l'j fent ":o^{19 ofthe constitution} of rndia and consequenly direct ,^"-;:^"::.': the Respondent to issue petitioner to commence *o'n order and afiow the 30^0/o of the work ",,o tted pursuant to Letter of

¶14

Acceptance issued^{videRef . s RCC/RI M/PT/1 57ITAPSO I 2024-25llAo/KANdated} 06.06.2025 in favour^{of the Petitioner pertainingto Tender Notification (GeMBid} No.GeM/202418t57o4575)issuedforBunkerSupplyofBlackoilandWhiteoil throughTankerBargestotheCoastal/ForeignRunSeaGoingVesselsberthed at lnner Harbour,^{Outer Harbour, Outer Anchorage of Vizag Port'}

¶15

NO 10F 25

¶16

PetitionunderSectionlslcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the Highcourt maybe pleased to} direct the^{Respondent to considerrepresentations dated06'0B'2025and} 07.08.2025(sentthroughe-mail)andpassappropriateorderssubmittedbythe Petitioner.

¶17

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI M'AVINASHREDDY}

¶18

REP.^FOR Counsel^{for the ResPondent No.l:SMT} SRI DOM^{INIC FERNANDES,SCFORIOCL}

¶19

ANGOTHU^NEHR U, Counsel^{for the ResPondentNo'2:} SC FOR^CENTRAL GOVT.

¶20

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶21

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.25116 of 2o25,

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Sri M. Avinash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt. Pravalika, learned counsel represents Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Standing Counsel for IOCL, for respondent No.l and Sri Angothu Nehru, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government, for respondent No.2

¶26

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication.

¶27