- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.200864 OF 2025 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SHIVANAND S/O LAXMAN HIPPARGI, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: CLASS-I CONTRACTOR, R/O: SBI COLONY, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, VIJAYAPURA – 586104. 2. BABU ALAKUNTE S/O YALLAPPA, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: CLASS-I CONTRACTOR, R/O: GOLGUMBAZ ROAD, JADAR GALLI, VIJAYAPURA – 586101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU -01. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, VIJAYAPURA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAPURA – 586101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOPALKRISHNA B.YADAV, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. S.S.HALALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by VARSHA N RASALKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.01.2025 IN APPEAL NO.318/2024,PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1/COMMISSIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-H. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ENTIRE TENDER PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN RESPECT OF ALL THE 25 TENDER WORKS DATED 21.08.2024 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-D WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY AND THEREBY DIRECT HIM TO CONDUCT FRESH AND RE-TENDER OF ALL THE 25 TENDER WORKS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN) Respondent No.2-Vijayapura Urban Development Authority issued a Tender Notification dated 21.08.2024 and called for bids for executing 25 works within its jurisdiction. The said works have been presently awarded in favour of several persons. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioners. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 2. Both petitioners are said to be Class-1 Civil Contractors and they are also said to belong to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities. The State has a policy wherein 24.10% of the contractual work is reserved in favour of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe. On the ground that the same has been violated and a higher standard of qualification has been prescribed for Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe, the writ petition is filed with the following prayers: a) “Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order quashing the impugned order dated 08.01.2025 in Appeal No.318/2024, passed by the Respondent No.1/Commissioner vide Annexure-H. b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order quashing the entire Tender Proceedings initiated by the respondent No.1 in respect of all the 25 Tender Works dated 21.08.2024 marked as Annexure-D which is illegal and arbitrary and thereby direct him to conduct fresh and re-tender of all the 25 tender works. c) Be pleased to allow this writ petition with costs and grant such other relief as this Hon’ble - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. The grounds on which the writ petition is filed are as follows: “15. That, the reasonings assigned by the said Appellate Authority is arbitrary in nature and per se illegal apparent on record of the procedure contemplated under the Act. That, the reasonings assigned are not in accordance with law; i) The randomization not followed while floating the bulk tender of 25 work tenders, which is clear from the web portal of KPPP (Karnataka Public Procurement Portal). ii] The EMD has to be maintained and applied as per the restrictions imposed under the KTTP Act (Amended Act 2017) for reserve categories with 1.25% of the work estimate cost, unfortunately it has been mentioned with 2.5% in violation of the said restriction imposition under the law. iii] As per Clause 3.2(b) of 2017 amended Govt. Order, it has to be Tender Work Qualification mandates the Contractor that satisfactory completion as a prime Contractor for at least any construction work to an extent of 25% of the cost of the work. For all works costing upto Rs.50 Lakhs. However, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 Respondent Department has violated by imposing a condition with saying similar nature of work, which is against the law. iv] Bid capacity of Contractor taking participation in the Tender shall be (A*N*5-B), however, the Respondent Department has adopted with (A*N*1.5-B), which is against the settled position of law.” 4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the bids have been called for in accordance with law. It is submitted that out of 25 works, 5 works have been reserved in favour of Scheduled Caste and 2 works have been reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe. Annexure R1 reflects the same. According to the Rules, 17.15% has to be reserved for Scheduled Caste and 6.95% of the works have to be reserved for Scheduled Tribe. The relevant Rules under the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement Rules, 2000, are as follows: “[27(A) Preference to Tenderers belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in Construction Works. For the purpose of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 these rules, all procurement entities specified under clause (d) of section 2, which are taking up Construction works shall be the notified departments and they shall follow the following procedures, namely: (a) all works approved in the Action Plan or Appendix-E of every financial year, the value of which does not exceed Rs.50.00 lakh shall be put to randomization for selecting 17.15% of these works to be tendered among registered contractors belonging to the Scheduled Castes Category and 6.95% to be tendered among contractors belonging to the Scheduled Tribes Category. (b) Works subsequently approved shall also have to be put to randomization periodically. (c) for randomization, an Engineering Division or the Jurisdiction of the Tender Inviting Authority shall be considered as a unit. (d) randomization of works shall be done when the number of works are more than four. (e) once a particular work is included in randomization process or were not put to randomization due to lack of adequate number of works, they shall not be put to randomization again - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 for the reasons that they were not selected during the first randomization process. (f) if no qualified tenderers belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes participate in the bid in two attempts under this rule, then these works shall be tendered as open category wherein all eligible bidders of General or Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes category can participate. (g) it shall be responsibility of the Executive Engineer or Tender Inviting Authority to verify the eligibility of the tenderers belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. Verification of tenderers belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes shall be done by the Tender Inviting Authority subject to explanations provided in Section 6. (h) if the contractor is a firm, then all the partners or members of the firm shall belong to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes as the case may be. (i) the contractor belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes shall be domicile of the State of Karnataka for more than 10 years.” 5. Perusal of Annexures-R1 and R2 produced along with the objection statement shows that out of 25 works, - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 5 works are reserved in favour of Scheduled Caste and 2 works are reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe and they have been done prior to inviting the bids. Bids have been called for as per the reserved category and works have been allotted to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates accordingly. This, in my opinion, satisfies the reservation and randomization process contemplated in law. There is no error committed by the respondents in this regard. 6. In respect of pre-qualification criteria, the counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner is relying upon old criteria and new criteria has been announced and the requirements are prescribed accordingly. He further submits that contract has been awarded in favour of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates only who satisfy the new criteria and are better qualified and more meritorious than the petitioners. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3336 WP No. 200864 of 2025 7. Under the said circumstances, I am of the opinion that the State has not violated any law in the process of issuing a tender notification and finalizing the same and awarding the work. Hence, the writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. In view of dismissal of writ petition, pending I.A.Nos.2/2025 and 3/2025 also stand dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VNR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30 CT:SI