A RAJASEKAR Vs. COMMISSIONER CHIDAMBARAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs.Hema Sampath, learned Senior Counsel, representing Mr.N.Sathish Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.V.Shanmugasundar, learned Special Government Pleader for the first and second respondents and Mr.P.Srinivas, learned counsel for the third respondent and perused the records.

(2.) The petitioner challenges the auction notification of the first respondent dated 21.11.2017 and the resolution dated 30.01.2018 and for consequential direction to the first respondent to conduct re-auction for Item No.18 in the above tender notification.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the first respondent issued a notification in Dinathanthi Tamil Daily on 09.12.2017 calling for public auction cum tender notification for the period 2018-2021 for several items. The petitioner approached the first respondent to receive tender schedule in Item No.18 and he was informed that public auction cum tender notification for Item No.18 could not be conducted as per schedule and a re-auction notification would be issued. Believing his words, he did not submit tender documents, but the second respondent by misusing his official capacity has confirmed the tender for Item No.18 in favour of the third respondent.