P.G. PRABHUPRASAD Vs. CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this Court assailing the Circular dated 28.6.2013 impugned at Annexure -F to the petition. The petitioner is also assailing a communication dated 4.9.2013 impugned at Annexure -E to the petition. The petitioner is a registered Class I civil contractor and claims to have executed civil works offered by the 1st respondent for the last 20 years. Presently, when the respondents issued the tender notification dated 12.3.2013 calling for tender in respect of the works indicated therein, the petitioner had responded to the same. Subsequent to the last date for application, it was noticed that the petitioner was the only contractor who had responded for the works indicated in the tender notification. When this was the position, the 2nd respondent is stated to have issued a Circular dated 28.6.2013 Annexure -F whereby a direction is issued to ail the concerned in the 1st respondent to re -tender the single tender in respect of emergent works, special repairs, improvement works and in the SCP/TSP works in order to encourage healthy competition among bidders. In view of the Circular, the tender submitted by the petitioner was rejected by the communication dated 4.9.2013 placed at Annexure -E. It is in that circumstance, the petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the action of the respondents contend that the Board of the 1st respondent Cauvery Neeravari Nigama Ltd. had taken a decision to delegate the powers of KBJNL to the Chief Engineers of CNNL and in that regard a Circular dated 8.10.2003 has been issued. It is therefore contended that when such a delegation of power is made to the Chief Engineers and tender notice has been issued calling tenders for the said work, the authority having the powers under delegation is required to complete the entire process and as such, the Managing Director did not have the authority to issue such Circular. It is further contended that such Circular issued by the authority is contrary to the decision of the Board whereby delegation of power was made. In such circumstances, it is contended that the tender notification did not disclose that the tender submitted is likely to be rejected if it is a single tender. The present action is initiated based on the Circular and such direction is not sustainable and therefore, is liable to be quashed.

(3.) IN the light of the contentions put forth, it is no doubt seen that based on the resolution of the Board, the manner in which the authorities are to exercise the delegated powers as provided. The delegation therefore has been made in respect of the Chief Engineers in CNNL and the same has been conveyed by the circular dated 8.10.2013. The tender notification has been issued by the Executive Engineer, Hemavathi Canal, Tumkur. The question therefore is as to whether in such circumstance, the Circular issued by the Managing Director is to be held as bad in law?