YANKEE CONSTRUCTIONS LLP REPRESENTED BY K K RADHA KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has made the following prayers before this Court:-

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Karnataka Slum Development Board ("the Board", for short) had invited tenders on 27.10.2014, for construction of houses including infrastructure in various slums of Bengaluru, Mysuru, and Madhugiri, under the 'Rajiv Awas Yojna' ("RAY", for short). Since the petitioner was eager to participate in the tender process, on 001.2015, the petitioner had submitted his bids on Package II and IV pertaining to Bangalore City Slums in Rajajinagar, Mahalakshmipuram, and T. Dasarahalli area. According to the petitioner, it remitted EMD, and complied with all the other conditions of the Tender. Subsequently, the Scheme was subsumed under the Scheme Pradhan Mantri Awas Housing ("PMAH", for short). In order to bring transparency to the tender process, the Government had constituted a State level Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee ("the Committee", for short). In its Sixth Meeting, held on 18.02017, the Committee approved the proposal of the Board to award construction of houses covered under eleven packages to the lowest evaluated bidders with certain conditions.

(3.) According to the petitioner, it was the lowest bidder in Package II and IV. Therefore, its tender was approved. According to the petitioner, while the Letter of Acceptance and Work Order were issued for the remaining nine tenderers, the Work Order and Letter of Acceptance were not issued to the petitioner, with regard to Package II and IV. Subsequently, on 26.05.2017, in its Seventh Meeting, the Committee approved reduction of dwelling units to be constructed in Package II and IV, and directed the Board to submit a detailed project report. Therefore, on 16.10.2017, the Board submitted a detailed project report. But, since the Committee was not satisfied, it again directed the Board to submit a report. Since the petitioner was aggrieved by the delay of issuance of Letter of Approval and the Work Order, it submitted a representation on 27.11.2017, before the Department of Housing, and the State Level Sanctioning & Monitoring Committee, the respondent Nos.1 and 2. However, even the representations have not elicited any response. For, so far, the work order was not issued to the petitioner. Hence, this petition before this Court.