LAWS(KAR)-2013-5-7

D. GANESH SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On May 21, 2013
D. Ganesh Shankar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties on Interlocutory Application nos. 2 and 3 of 2013, filed by the respondents for vacating the ex-parte order of stay granted as on 26.4.2013. The petitioners are said to be service providers engaged in collection and disposal of solid waste material in the city of Bangalore, on behalf of the Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (Hereinafter referred to as the 'BBMP', for brevity), at land fill sites designated by the BBMP. The petitioners are said to have been so engaged by the BBMP for the past 10 years, and some of them for the past 20 years.

(2.) The petitioners have called in question two sets of tenders, the BBMP had issued eight tender notices for the purpose of collection and disposal of solid waste within the city of Bangalore. The said tender notices dated 18.9.2012 were issued in respect of 89 packages. It transpires the BBMP had received responses in respect of 81 packages and had not received any response in respect of 8 packages. Of the 81 bids received, four were excluded as the same did not qualify. The BBMP had ought approval of the State Government in respect of 77 packages, by its letter dated 31.10.2012. The State Government is said to have accorded its approval in respect of 76 packages, as per its order dated 21.11.2012. The government took note of the fact that in respect of one particular package-its approval was not warranted.

(3.) The BBMP is said to have issued a tender notification dated 3.11.2012 in respect of the said 12 packages. The BBMP, however, sent a proposal dated 2.3.2013 to the State Government, seeking approval of the tenders since the bid amount in respect of each contract exceeded Rs. 5 crore. The government granted approval to proceed with the tender in respect of 12 packages, vide government order dated 20.3.2013, pursuant to which a circular dated 19.4.2013 was issued. It is the said government order and circular that are under challenge in this petition.