SREE MRUTHI GRAMEEN UDYOGA KENDRA Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLILES CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this petition is a registered Grameena Udyoga Kendra, repre-sented by its Proprietor. Petitioner has sought for quashing the Notification as per Annex-ure-M dated 27th November 2008 which is also published vide Annexure-Ml in 'praja vani' daily news paper dated 29th November, 2008 and to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to supply Double Fortified Salt to the Districts in respect of which, the petitioner's tender is found to be the lowest.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that, in pursuance of the Notification issued by first respondent dated 27th September 2008 calling for tenders for supply of 'double Fortified Salt', petitioner^has also submitted his tender form along with several other persons who were eligible. Bid has been opened from 3rd November 2008 to 6th November, 2008 and petitioner quotation was found to be the lowest in respect of twenty Districts. The said fact has been communicated to the petitioner through the District Manager of the said twenty Districts and further, petitioner has even been communicated by way of a communication as per Annexure D dated 17th november, 2008 and thereafter, he has received communications dated 19th November 2008,19tl) November, 2008,17th November 2008,20th November, 2008 and 18th November 2008 vide Annexures E, F, G. H, and j respectively directing the petitioner to produce the Analysis report from the National institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad immediately. Be that as it may, in pursuance of the communications vide Annexures D to H and J, petitioner rushed to the National Institute of Nutrition at Hyderabad in order to secure the analysis report as sought for by first respondent in respect of the 'double Fortified Salt'. To the shock and surprise of the petitioner, petitioner came to know of the short term retender from the first respondent vide Annexure M dated 27th November, 2008; without any justification and contrary to the terms and conditions of the tender documents for 'double Fortified Salt'. The said re-tender was issued cancelling the earlier Tender Notification dated 27th September, 2008 for supply of 'double Fortified Salt' contrary to the rel--evant provisions of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999 ('act' for short) read with Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Rules, 2000 ('rules' for short) and calling for fresh tender from the eligible applicants. Being aggrieved by the impugned re-tender Notification issued by first respondent and seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for respondents - Corporation.