Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 44 (AP)

Vinayaka Agencies v. State Of AP

2023-01-04

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

body2023
ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed challenging the proceedings, dated 27.09.2022, of the 3rd respondent Joint Collector of Chittoor District, in issuing supply order in favour of 5th respondent for supply of Y.S.R. Sampoorna Poshana Kits to 21 ICDS projects covering three districts i.e., Chittoor, Tirupati and Annamayya Districts, for a period of eleven months i.e. from 01.10.2022 to 30.08.2023, alleging that the said proceedings are illegal and consequently, prayed to set aside the said order. 2. Heard Sri V.Venugopal Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for respondents 1 to 4; and Sri R.N.Hemendranath Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 5th respondent. 3. The 4th respondent Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency of the composite Chittoor District, issued e-procurement tender notification on 14.09.2021 for supply of Y.S.R. Sampoorna Poshana Kits in the erstwhile District of Chittoor, consisting of the present Chittoor, Tirupati and Annamayya Districts. The petitioner has submitted his tender. However, he was disqualified from participating the said tender process on various grounds. The petitioner challenged the said order disqualifying him from participating in the tender process by way of filing W.P.No.22494 of 2021. An interim order was passed in the said Writ Petition in favour of the petitioner staying all further proceedings pursuant to the said tender notification, dated 14.09.2021. After hearing, the said Writ Petition was dismissed on 05.09.2022 holding that the petitioner is not qualified to participate in the tender process. 4. Thereafter, on 27.09.2022 the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, issued award for 21 ICDS projects in the erstwhile Chittoor District pursuant to the tender notification dated 14.09.2021 for a period of eleven months. The petitioner filed a writ appeal in W.A.No.754 of 2022 challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 05.09.2022 in W.P.No.22494 of 2021. The said Writ Appeal was disposed of by the Division Bench of this High Court on 11.10.2022 as infructuous giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition seeking the relief as can be claimed at that stage of the proceedings and further directed, if any such Writ Petition is filed, to consider the same on its own merits. 5. 5. After the said Writ Appeal was disposed of, as stated supra, the Joint Collector, Tirupati District, granted permission to enter into an agreement for supply of kits for a period of 11 months in Tirupati District. Accordingly, agreements were entered for supply of Kits in Tirupati District. Similarly, proceedings were issued by the Joint Collector of Annamayya District for supply of commodities in five ICDS projects of Annamayya District. 6. Thereafter, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the said proceedings issued by the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, dated 27.09.2022. 7. The said order dated 27.09.2022 of Joint Collector, Chittoor District, was primarily questioned in the writ petition by the petitioner on the ground that the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, is not competent to issue any such orders for supply of the commodities in Annamayya District and Tirupati District, and he has no jurisdiction to issue any such orders in respect of Annamayya and Tirupati Districts. 8. At the time of admission, after hearing the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court on 30.12.2022 ordered for interim suspension of the proceedings, dated 24.12.2022 issued by the Joint Collector, Annamayya District, on the ground that the said proceedings are issued without calling for any fresh tenders unilaterally, as alleged by the petitioner at that time. 9. The 4th respondent filed counter-affidavit denying the material averments of affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is pleaded that the Writ Petition was filed with a mala fide intention to stall the supply of food items to the beneficiaries. It is pleaded that the proceedings issued by the Joint Collector, Chittoor District for supply of food items even in Tirupati and Annamayya Districts are not opposed by the Joint Collectors of Tirupati and Annamayya Districts and as such, the petitioner cannot question the validity of the same. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 10. The 5th respondent filed a separate counter-affidavit opposing the claim of the petitioner. It is stated that as the petitioner failed in the earlier round of litigation, that he has filed the present Writ Petition with all untenable pleas. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 10. The 5th respondent filed a separate counter-affidavit opposing the claim of the petitioner. It is stated that as the petitioner failed in the earlier round of litigation, that he has filed the present Writ Petition with all untenable pleas. It is stated that the erstwhile common District of Chittoor was subsequently trifurcated into three districts i.e. Chittoor, Tirupati and Annamayya Districts and the notification was issued in the common District of Chittoor and when the tender process was finalised in favour of the 5th respondent that the petitioner has filed the earlier Writ Petition and obtained stay of further proceedings and in the meanwhile, the trifurcation of the district took place and by the time the earlier litigation ended by way of disposal of the Writ Appeal filed by the petitioner, the 5th respondent could not enjoy the benefit of the order obtained by him as a successful bidder in the tender process and after the earlier litigation ended that the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, issued orders in favour of the 5th respondent being the successful bidder, which is dated 27.09.2022, and subsequently, after noticing the defect in issuing the said order by the Joint Collector, Chittoor, that the order dated 24.12.2022 was issued by the Joint Collector, Annamayya District, for supply of the food items in the said District by the 5th respondent. Therefore, as the said order was issued in connection with and in terms of the earlier tender process that was finalised, it is stated that no fresh tender is required to be given, as alleged in the Writ Petition. So, the 5th respondent prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 11. As noticed supra, the order dated 27.09.2022 is being challenged in this Writ Petition by the petitioner. Before considering the legal validity of the said order, be it noted here itself that this is a second round of litigation initiated by the petitioner. Earlier, after the e-procurement tender notification was issued on 14.09.2021, when the petitioner intends to participate in the said tender process, he was disqualified to participate in the said tender process on certain grounds. He approached this Court by way of filing W.P.No.22494 of 2021 challenging the said order of disqualification and obtained interim stay of further proceedings in it on 14.12.2021. He approached this Court by way of filing W.P.No.22494 of 2021 challenging the said order of disqualification and obtained interim stay of further proceedings in it on 14.12.2021. So, the entire process was stalled on account of the said interim order. Ultimately, the said Writ Petition of the petitioner was itself dismissed. A learned Single Judge of this Court has upheld the decision of disqualifying the petitioner to participate in the said tender process. The Writ Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said order to the Division Bench of this High Court was also disposed of as it became infructuous giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition. 12. After the said Writ Appeal was disposed of, the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, issued proceedings for supply of the said food items in the District of Tirupati and also in the District of Annamayya as during the pendency of the proceedings of the above Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal, the erstwhile District of Chittoor was trifurcated into three Districts i.e., Chittoor, Tirupati and Annamayya Districts. The said order is dated 27.09.2022. 13. The petitioner challenges the legal validity of the said order, dated 27.09.2022, on two grounds i.e. (1) that the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, is not competent to issue any such order for supply of the food items in the other Districts i.e. Tirupati and Annamayya Districts and (2) that the said order was issued without calling for fresh tenders. 14. As regards the first ground is concerned, it is relevant to note here that after noticing the technical defect in issuing the order dated 27.09.2022 by the Joint Collector, Chittoor District, for supply of food items in Tirupati and Annamayya Districts, the Joint Collector, Annamayya District, has issued an order, dated 24.12.2022, in favour of the 5th respondent, who is the successful bidder for supply of food items in Annamayya District. Therefore, the defect that was crept in the order dated 27.09.2022 relating to the competency of the officer/authority i.e. Joint Collector, Chittoor District, in issuing the said order for supply of food items in Annamayya District, now stands cured on account of the order, dated 24.12.2022, which is now placed on record, for supply of food items in Annamayya District. Therefore, the defect that was crept in the order dated 27.09.2022 relating to the competency of the officer/authority i.e. Joint Collector, Chittoor District, in issuing the said order for supply of food items in Annamayya District, now stands cured on account of the order, dated 24.12.2022, which is now placed on record, for supply of food items in Annamayya District. Therefore, the petitioner can now no more challenge the validity of the said proceedings on the ground of competency of the officer, who issued the said proceedings, and on the ground of want of jurisdiction of the said officer over Annamayya District. 15. As regards the second ground is concerned, the main contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that, even to issue any such order in favour of the 5th respondent for supply of food items in Annamayya District, a fresh tender notification has to be issued and no such order can be issued on the basis of the earlier tender notification. 16. The said contention holds no water. It is to be noticed here that after the earlier tender notification was issued and after it was finalised, and after the 5th respondent herein became successful bidder for supply of food items, the entire process relating to the said tender notification was stalled on account of the order of stay of further proceedings passed by this Court in the earlier round of litigation initiated by the petitioner in W.P.No.22494 of 2021. So, on account of the said order of stay of further proceedings passed by this Court and till the Writ Petition was dismissed and till the Writ Appeal, preferred thereagainst, was disposed of, further process relating to the said tender notification could not be taken up. In the meanwhile, the erstwhile common District of Chittoor was trifurcated as stated supra into three districts viz., Chittoor, Tirupati and Annamayya Districts. After the earlier round of litigation came to an end, the order, dated 24.12.2022, was issued in favour of the 5th respondent for supply of food items in Annamayya District. Therefore, as the said order was issued in continuation and in connection with the earlier tender notification, after further process was revived which was stalled due to interim stay order, no fresh tender notification is required to be issued in the said facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, as the said order was issued in continuation and in connection with the earlier tender notification, after further process was revived which was stalled due to interim stay order, no fresh tender notification is required to be issued in the said facts and circumstances of the case. The earlier tender notification was not cancelled and it has been still in force. 17. Although, the said notification was issued for a period of one year i.e. from 1st October, 2021 to 30th September, 2022, as no effect was given to the said tender notification finalising the same after the 5th respondent became successful bidder, and as the further process is not initiated in respect of the said tender notification on account of stay that was granted by this Court, it is to be held that the said period of one year commenced afresh from the date when an order was issued in favour of the 5th respondent to give effect to the proceedings finalising the said tender process. Therefore, it cannot be said that the order issued in favour of the 5th respondent is bad in law on the aforesaid two grounds, which are now urged by the petitioner. 18. Although, an order was issued during the interregnum period i.e. during the pendency of the earlier round of litigation in this Court, by the Director, Women Development and Child Welfare Department, in favour of the petitioner herein for supply of food items, it was only an order issued as a stopgap arrangement made to see that the beneficiaries under the scheme are not deprived of the benefits of the scheme. So, the petitioner cannot claim any right by virtue of the said orders to continue supply of food items for the remaining period. Since, it is only a stopgap arrangement, it would cease from the day on which the proceedings dated 24.12.2022 was issued by the Joint Collector, Annamayya, in favour of the 5th respondent. 19. The petitioner, who was found to be not qualified to participate in the tender process, cannot further stall the said proceedings by way of seeking the present reliefs in this Writ Petition. The 5th respondent is entitled to supply the food items in Annamayya District, as per the order, dated 24.12.2022. 20. Therefore, there are no merits in the Writ Petition to entertain the same. 21. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. The 5th respondent is entitled to supply the food items in Annamayya District, as per the order, dated 24.12.2022. 20. Therefore, there are no merits in the Writ Petition to entertain the same. 21. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.