A JAYAPAUL Vs. COMMISSIONER TAMBARAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.M.Rajendiran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.V.M.Velumani, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 29.02.2012 passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.7779/2011/A1, seeking to quash the same and for a consequential direction to the respondent to issue the confirmation order in his favour at Rs.10,20,000.00 for a consecutive period of three years block from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 as notified by the respondent in its tender notice dated 13.01.2012 or to issue the confirmation order at Rs.4,00,000.00 for one year, i.e. 2012 to 2013 for the reason that he is the successful bidder compared with other bidders.

(3.) WHEN the petitioner was eagerly waiting for the opening of the tender to know about the status of the tender, the respondent conducted an open tender on 08.02.2012 at 12.00 noon and called for the open tender for 2012-2013. When the petitioner asked the respondent as to why the open tender was conducted for one year i.e. 2012-2013, when the sealed tender called for three years i.e. 2012-2013 to 2014-2015, the respondent did not give proper explanation to him and continued his stand to conduct the open tender for one year as against the tender notice period of three years. Since the petitioner really intended to succeed in the bid, he participated in the open tender on payment of EMD and quoted a sum of Rs.4,00,000.00 for one year. The petitioner alone participated in the open tender and succeeded at the above said amount.