- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3919 OF 2023 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN: M/S. JMC CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT GROUND FLOOR, H.NO. 8-3-944/4, YELLAREDDYGUDA, SVR TRAVELS LANE, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500 016. REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956. REGIONAL OFFICE AT NO.6, 1ST CROSS, 2ND STAGE, HOYSALA NAGAR, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560038. REP BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. MADAN MOHAN A, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O SREENIVASALU …PETITIONER (BY SRI. I. THARANATH POOJARY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. JAITHRA J NARAYAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. Digitally signed by KAVYA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 2. CHIEF COMMISSIONER BBMP, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 002 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROADS INFRASTRUCTURE DASARAHALLI DIVISION BBMP, BENGALURU - 560 002 4. CHIEF ENGINEER RI-DASARAHALLI BBMP, BENGALURU - 560 073 5. MR. M.S. VENKATESH MSV CONSTRUCTIONS COMPANY, NO. 163, 5TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, PRAKASH NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 021 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NIAK, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VIJAY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P. CHIDANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; R5 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 02/02/2023 PASSED THE R-2 CHIEF COMMISSIONER BBMP PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B MADE IN NO. CCOM/PR/87/2022-23/52 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 02.02.2023 passed by the second respondent - Chief Commissioner of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike (BBMP) by which the contract awarded to the petitioner by the Chief Commissioner himself is set aside. 2. Heard Shri I. Tharanath Poojary, learned Senior counsel for Shri Jaithra J. Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri Shamanth Naik, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Shri Vijay, learned counsel for Shri P. Chidananda, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. 3. Facts in brief germane are as follows: A notice inviting tender is issued by the respondent - BBMP on 04.07.2022. The tender was for the purpose of surfacing of the road. On 21.12.2022, it transpires that the technical bid was opened and the petitioner was found technically qualified and later on 29.12.2022, the petitioner was - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 declared a successful bidder and a proposal for acceptance was forwarded to the Government. The Government then on evaluation of both the technical bid and the financial bid and also negotiation with the petitioner resolved to forward the petitioner's tender for Government approval. When things stood thus, it transpires that the fifth respondent which according to the learned Senior counsel is a habitual litigant files an appeal before the second respondent- the Chief Commissioner, who had himself issued the tender and found that the petitioner was eligible to be awarded the tender. Sits in appeal over his own decision and passes an order on 02.02.2023, the impugned herein by allowing the appeal and cancelling the tender in its entirety and going for a fresh tender. 4. The learned Senior counsel would submit that the fifth respondent, who at every point in time files appeals against the award of tender to certain parties and then vanishes. The same thing has happened before this Court as well, he served and remains unrepresented. The learned Senior counsel would submit that his object is achieved by - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 getting the tender shelved and therefore, he would not appear before the Court. 5. The learned counsel representing the BBMP would vehemently refute the submission in contending that no award of contract had taken place in favour of the petitioner and therefore, no right of the petitioner is taken away to question the action of the appellate authority in entertaining the appeal and cancelling the tender awarded to the petitioner. The learned counsel would seek dismissal of the petition, so does the learned HCGP representing the State. 6. The fifth respondent as observed herein above though served remains unrepresented. 7. The facts narrated herein above are not in dispute, they would not require any reiteration. The issue lies in a narrow compass. The notification of tender on 04.07.2022 and the petitioner being declared a successful bidder and the respondents negotiating with him and also recommending for Government's approval for the tender to be awarded to the petitioner are all a matter of record. The communication from the Chief Commissioner to the Government reads as follows: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 "ರವೆ, ಾನ ಅಧ ರು ಾಗೂ ಅಪರ ಮುಖ ಾಯದಗಳ, ಅಾರಯುಕ ಸ !, ನಗ"ಾ#ವೃ%& ಇ(ಾ)ೆ. *ಾಸ +ೌಧ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ 560 001 ಾನ "ೆ, *ಷಯ:-2021-22.ೇ +ಾ0ನ ಮುಖ ಮಂ!2ಗಳ ಅಮೃತ ನಗ"ೋ4ಾ5ನ 6ೕಜ.ೆಯ8 9ಾಸರಹ;< *=ಾನ ಸ>ಾ ?ೇತ2ೆ@ ರೂ.1000.00 ಲ ಗಳ ಅನು9ಾನವನುB ರ+ೆ Cಾಂಬೕಕರಣ ಾಮಾಗಳನುB ೈೊಳ<ಲು ಉ9ೆHೕIರುವ "Resurfacing of SM road, Rajagopalanagar main road & ORR from Jalahalli cross to Sonal Garments under R1-Dasarahalli Division" AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ CAzÁdÄ ªÉÆvÀÛPÉÌ ಆಡ;4ಾತMಕ ಅನುNೕದ.ೆ ಾಗೂ OೆಂಡP ಅನುNೕದ.ೆ Qೕಡುವ ಬೆR. G¯ÉèÃR :-1 ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå: £ÀCE 299 JAJ£ïªÉÊ 2022 (E) ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ¢£ÁAPÀ;18.06.2022 Sೕಲ@ಂಡ *ಷಯೆ@ ಸಂಬಂIದಂ4ೆ, ಸಾರದ ಆ9ೇಶ ಸಂ)ೆ : £ÀCE 299 JAJ£ïªÉÊ 2022 (E) ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ¢£ÁAPÀ;18.06.2022 ಅನುಬಂಧ-06 U2Vಾ 6ೕಜ.ೆಯ ಕ2ಮ ಸಂ)ೆ : 176, 177 ಮತು 178 gÀ PÁªÀÄUÁjUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÁåPÉÃeï CrAiÀÄ°è "Resurfacing of SM road, Rajagopalanagar main road & ORR from Jalahalli cross to Sonal Garments under R1-Dasarahalli Division" PÁªÀÄUÁjUÉ gÀÆ. 1000.00 ಲ ಗ;ೆ ಅನು9ಾನವನುB ಒದ[IದುH. 6ೕಜ.ಾ ವರ%ಯನುB ತVಾI ರೂ.879.03 ಲ ಗ;ೆ ಇ-\2ಕೂ P Sಂ] ಮೂಲಕ %^-ಲೋ_ೆ _ೆಂಡP ಅಾ^Qಸ(ಾ[ರುತ`ೆ ಾಗೂ _ೆಂಡPಗಳ ಆaಕ ೌಲ ಾಪನ ಮತು ದರ ಸಂ=ಾನವನುB ನCೆI (ನಡವ; ಪ2!ಯನುB ಲಗ!I9ೆ) 6ೕಜ.ೆಯ ಅಂ9ಾಜು Nತೆ@ ಆಡ;4ಾತMಕ ಅನುNೕದ.ೆ ಮತು _ೆಂಡP ಅನುNೕದ.ೆೋ9ೆ. Name of the Work:- "Resurfacing of SM road. Rajagopalanagar main road & ORR from Jalahalli cross to Sonal Garments under RI-Dasarahalli Division" PÀæ. ¸ÀA ಸಂbಪ *ವರ 1. CAzÁdÄ Nತ gÀÆ. 1000.00 ®PÀëUÀ¼ÀÄ 2. zÀgÀ¥ÀnÖ C¼ÀªÀrPÉ PÀ.¯ÉÆà E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀævÀÛzÀ 2021-2022 £Éà ¸Á°£À ZÁ°Û zÀgÀUÀ½UÉ (¢:7/4/2022 gÀ - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 ¥ÀjµÀÌçvÀ zÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ) 3. (ೆಕ@ ೕjೆ / ಅನು9ಾನ ¸À£Áä£Àå ªÀÄÄRå ªÀÄAwæUÀ¼À CªÀÄÈvÀ £ÀUÀgÉÆÃvÁÜ£À AiÉÆÃd£É CzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå £ÀCE 299 JAJ£ïªÉÊ 2022 ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ¢£ÁAPÀ;18.06.2022 gÀÆ. 10.00 PÉÆÃn. 4. ಕರಡು_ೆಂಡP ಅನುNೕದ.ೆ ಮುRå, ಅ#ಯಂತರರು. ರ+ೆ ಮೂಲಭೂತ +ೌPÀAiÀÄð 5. _ೆಂಡPೆ ಇಟm NvÀÛ ರೂ.879.03 ಲ ಗಳ 6. _ೆಂಡP ಪ2ಕಟoೆ ಸಂ)ೆ No: EE/RIDhalli/TEND/03/2022-23,໖: 04.07.2022 7. %ನಪ!2ೆಗಳ0p ಪ2ಕಟoೆ *ಜಯ`ಾq ಾಗೂ "Indian Express", %.ಾಂಕ: 06.07.2022 8. _ೆಂಡP ಸ0pೆ ಅಂ!ಮ %.ಾಂಕ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 25.07.2022 gÀAzÀÄ 4.00 UÀAnUÉ. 9. _ೆಂಡP ಪದ&! %^ ಲೋ_ೆ ಪದ&! 10. ಉಪ6ೕ[Iದ Standard Bid Document KTTP Standard Bid Document KW-04 11. e - Procurement Indent No. BBMP/2022- 23/RD/WORK_INDENT52204 _ೆಂಡP ಪ2ಕಟoೆ *ವರವr Sೕಲ@ಂಡ ೋಷmಕದ0p *ವIರುವಂ!ದುH. %^-ಲೋs 4ಾಂ!2ಕ _ೆಂಡPನ0p 08 ಗು!ೆ9ಾರರು >ಾಗವtIದುH. ಗು!ೆ9ಾರರು ಸ0pIರುವ 9ಾಖ(ೆಗಳ ಅನ^ಯ %.ಾಂಕ:21.12.2022 ರ 4ಾಂ!2ಕ ೌಲ ಾಪನ ಸ ! ಸ>ೆಯ ನಡುವ;ಯ !ೕಾನದಂ4ೆ 4ಾಂ!2ಕ`ಾ[ ಅಹೊಂಡ 04 uv 9ಾರರ ಆaಕ uvನುB %.ಾಂಕ:26.12.2022 ರಂದು 4ೆ"ೆಯ(ಾ[ದುH. *ವರಗಳ ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡಂ!ರುತ9ೆ. PÀæ. ¸À A. vÁAwæPÀ ೌಲ ಾಪನದ 0p ಅಹ"ಾದಗು!ೆ 9ಾರgÀÄ _ೆಂಡP ಇಟm Nತ 2018- 19.ೇ +ಾ0ನ (ೋ.ಇ. zÀgÀ¥ÀnÖ zÀgÀUÀ¼ÀAvÉ (gÀÆ.UÀ¼À°è) (2018-19£Éà ¸Á°£À ¯ÉÆÃ.E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¢:02.11.2021 gÀ ¥ÀjµÀÌçvÀ zÀgÀUÀ¼ÀAvÉ mÉAqïVlÖ ªÉÆvÀÛ (gÀÆ.UÀ¼À°è) ಗು!ೆ9ಾರ ರು_ೆಂಡ P ನ0p ನಮೂ%Iರು ವ Nತ. (ರೂ.ಗಳ0p) 2018-19£Éà ¸Á°£À ªÀÄAdÆgÁzÀ zÀgÀUÀ½UÉ ºÉÆð¹zÁU À ±ÉÃPÀqÁªÁgÀÄ ZÁ°Û ¯ÉÆÃ.E¯ÁSÉAiÀ Ä zÀgÀ ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ ¢:09.11.2022 gÀ ¥ÀjµÀÌçvÀ zÀgÀUÀ½UÉ ºÉÆð¹zÁUÀ ±ÉÃPÀqÀªÁgÀÄ µÀgÁ 01 M/sJMC Constructions Pvt Ltd 8.15.72.661. 40 ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.7.20% PÀrªÉÄ ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.0.29% ºÉZÀÄÑ 1-1 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 02 M/S ADR Contractors (Ajay.R) 9.22.88.615. 04 ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.4.99% ºÉZÀÄÑ ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.13.47% ºÉZÀÄÑ 1-2 03 B B Umesh (M/s SMLP ASPHALTS) 9.31.76.505. 38 ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.6.00% ºÉZÀÄÑ ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.14.56% ºÉZÀÄÑ 1-3 04 M/s. PSG Constructions (Puttaswamy Gow da) 87902622.75/ - 8.13.34.528.25/ - 9.99.96.240. 38 ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.13.76 % ºÉZÀÄÑ ±ÉÃPÀqÀ.22.94% ºÉZÀÄÑ 1-4 ಕQಷx ದರದ uಡy9ಾರ"ಾದ M/s JMC Constructions Pvt Ltd ರವರು ನಮೂ%Iರುವ Nತ ರೂ.8.15.72.661.40 ಗಳನುB (z.ಎ|.s. 4ೆೆ ೊರತುಪ8I) _ೆಂಡP[ಟm Nತ ರೂ.8.79.02.622.75 ಗ;ೆ (ಮಂಜೂ"ಾದ ದರಗ;ೆ) ೋ0I9ಾಗ }ೇಕಡ 7.20% ರಷುm ಕ8S ಮತು ಪ2ಸಕ 2021-22.ೇ +ಾ0ನ ಕ.ಾಟಕ (ೋೋಪ6ೕ[ ಇ(ಾ)ೆ ~ೆಂಗಳ•ರು ವೃತದ %.ಾಂಕ:09.11.2022 ರ ಪಷ€ತ ಇಶ•"ೇ] ದರಗ;ೆ ೋ0I9ಾಗ }ೇಕCಾ 0.29% ೆಚುƒ zÀರಗ„ಾ[ರುತ9ೆ, ಆaಕ ೌಲ ಾಪನ ಪ2+ಾವ.ೆಯನುB 4ಾಂ!2ಕ/ಆaಕ ೌಲ ಾಪನ ಮತು ದರ ಸಂ9ಾನ ಸ !ೆ ಮಂ8Iರುವ sಪ…qಯನುB ಪ0I(ಾ†ತು. J¯ï-1 UÀÄwÛUÉPÁgÀgÁzÀ M/s JMC Constructions Pvt Ltd gÀªÀgÀÄ gÀÆ 8.15.72.661.40 (f.J¸ï.n.vÉjUÉ ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹) UÀ¼À£ÀÄß £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹zÀÄÝ, nAqÀgï VlÖ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ.8.79.02.622.75 UÀ½UÉ (ಮಂಜೂ"ಾದ ದರಗ;ೆ) ೋ0I9ಾಗ }ೇಕಡ 7.20%.ರಷುm ಕ8S ಮತು ಪ2ಸಕ 2021-22.ೇ +ಾ0ನ ಕ.ಾಟಕ (ೋೋಪ6ೕ[ ಇ(ಾ)ೆ ~ೆಂಗಳ•ರು ವೃತದ %.ಾಂಕ:09.11.2022 ಪಷ€ತ ಇಶ•"ೇ] ದರಗ;ೆ ೋ0I9ಾಗ }ೇಕCಾ 0.29% ೆಚುƒ ದರ`ಾ[ದುH, ಸದ NತªÀÅ ಸಮಂಜಸ`ಾ[ದುH ಇದರ ಬೆR !ೕಾನ ೈೊಳ<ಲು ಸಾರದ ಮಟmದ0p ರ‡ತ`ಾ[ರುವ ಅಾರಯುಕ ಸ !ಯ ಮುಂ9ೆ ಮಂ8ಸುವˆದು ಸೂಕ`ೆಂದು Qಣ†I9ೆ. ಈ t.ೆB(ೆಯ0p Sೕಲ@ಂಡ ಾಮಾಯ ಅಂ9ಾಜು Nತೆ@ ಆಡ;4ಾತMಕ ಅನುNೕದ.ೆ ಮತು ಕQಷx ದರದ _ೆಂಡP ಅನುNೕದ.ೆಾ[ ಸಾರ%ಂದ ರ‡ತ`ಾ[ರುವ ಅಾರಯುಕ ಸ !ಯ ಮುಂ9ೆ ಪ2+ಾವ.ೆ ಮಂ8ಸಲುೋ9ೆ." 8. The fifth respondent prefers an appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority is the same officer, who had communicated the grant of award of contract in favour of the petitioner. He sits over his own decision, entertains the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 appeal without hearing the petitioner, passes an order of cancellation of tender and directs a fresh tender to be notified. No reasons are forthcoming as to why a fresh tender is notified, despite the tender being found appropriate by the appellate authority himself. 9. The case at hand is shrouded with illegalities, there is no reason acceptable in law in the order of the appellate authority, as to why the tender is to be shelved and a fresh tender is to be called and the other is the order of the appellate authority is without hearing the petitioner. In the normal circumstance, both these instances would not have given a right to the petitioner, since the first instance would be that the act of the respondent for cancelling the tender would give no right to a tender to whom contract is not awarded. In the case at hand, it is an admitted fact that no contract is awarded, but the action of the respondent in cancelling the tender without hearing the petitioner when the appellate authority himself had opined that the petitioner was fit to be awarded the contract and had recommended it to the Government. The illegality subsists, therefore on the aforesaid score, the petition deserves - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:9541 WP No. 3919 of 2023 to be succeed, as a result of which the order impugned is rendered unsustainable. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 02.02.2023 passed by the second respondent - Chief Commissioner, BBMP stands quashed. (iii) The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits that would flow from the quashment of the order. Sd/- ______________________ JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4 CT:SNN