APHC010214582026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10967/2026 Between: 1. K SURESH BABU, S/O. KODURI VENKATESLWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS OCC DIET CONTRACTOR R/O. T-807, MID VALLEY CITY, ATMAKUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522503 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HEALTH MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A..-522503 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT DIET MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT.-520001 ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT CUM ADDL DIRECTOR AND MEMBER CONVENER, HOSPITAL DIETARY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT.-520001 ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE DISTRICT DIET MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, NTR DISTRICT, O/O THE SUPERINTENDENT, GGH, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH .-520001 ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of respondents in contemplating to reject/ disqualify the case of the petitioner from participating in the financial bid process pursuant to the tender notification issued by the Respondent vide Rc.No.3046/S1/Diet/GGH,VJA/2025 dt.16.07.2025 on frivolous grounds as illegal, unreasonable, oppose to the principles of fair play, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to law as well as G.O.Ms.No.325 dated 01.11.2011 and also in utter violation of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the financial bid process and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's Solvency Certificate and EMD Demand Draft as valid and subsisting documents for the purpose of the subject tender processpursuant to the notification issued by the Respondents vide Rc.No.3046/S1/ Diet/ GGH,VJA/2025 dt.16.07.2025, and to refrain from rejecting the same on the ground of "expiry" in the absence of any specific stipulation in the tender document while allowing the petitioner to participate in the financial bid process pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10967/2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in contemplating to reject/ disqualify the case of the petitioner from participating in the financial bid process pursuant to the tender notification issued by the Respondent vide Rc.No.3046/S1/Diet/GGH,VJA/2025 dt.16.07.2025 on frivolous grounds as illegal, unreasonable, oppose to the principles of fair play, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to law as well as G.O.Ms.No.325 dated 01.11.2011 and also in utter violation of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the financial bid process and pass such other order.” 2. Heard Sri K.Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted his bid pursuant to the tender notice issued on 16.07.2025. In compliance of the directions of this Court in W.P.No.18513 of 2025, respondents are proceeding with the finalization of the bids submitted pursuant to the notice dated 16.07.2025. While finalizing the bids, the respondent authorities in collusion with the other tenderers trying to disqualify or reject the bid of the petitioner, who is an existing contractor with malifide intention 4 and without transparency. He further pleaded that even though it appears it is to be an apprehension on the part of the petitioner, but the tendering authority is not transparent and not proceeding in accordance with the terms of the tender. 4. Learned senior counsel further submits that the apprehension of the petitioner is supported by reasonable evidence. Therefore, the relief seeking in the writ petition is that the respondents should be directed to observe the terms of the tender notice without allowing any deviations, alterations and without there being any bias or malice. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader furnished written instructions dated 28.04.2026 issued by respondent No.3, who is competent authority either to finalize the tender or to award the tender as per the terms of the tender notice. Which states that the bids were already opened on 15.04.2026, but not finalized so far. It also states that the tendering authority would follow and strictly observe the terms of the tender notice without there being any deviation and any bias. As per terms of the tender notice, the petitioner/bidders should be informed about decision of the tendering authority regarding rejection/disqualification, if any, in the process of finalization of tender by assigning reasons as required. 5 6. Heard the learned counsel for all the parties and perused the material placed on record. It is an admitted fact that the 3rd respondent herein, who is tendering authority already opened the bids on 15.04.2026. The petitioner herein is one of the bidder among all others and so far except opening all the bids the tender process was not finalized as admitted by the respondents vide instructions dated 28.04.2026. It is settled law that the tendering authority is master of the tender and shall adhere to the terms of the tender notice while evaluating and awarding the tender. The contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the tendering authority is in collusion with the some other tenderers and trying to reject/disqualify the bid of the petitioner, is only an apprehension for the reason any rejection shall support by reasons and as per terms of notice. It is well settled procedure that the respondent/tendering authority being a public authority shall follow and comply all the terms of the tender notice in strict sense and if any disqualification or rejection should be informed to the bidders at the earliest as per the terms of the tender notice and in compliance of the principle of fair play and transparency. Therefore, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are hereby directed to proceed further in accordance with terms of the tender notice, without there being any element of deviation or bias as envisaged and in accordance with law. 6 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Learned Government Pleader is directed to inform the order of this Court to the respondents. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 28.04.2026 NNoottee:: CC..CC.. bbyy ttwwoo ddaayyss BB//oo..TTPPSS 7 118 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 10967/2026 28.04.2026 NNoottee:: CC..CC.. bbyy ttwwoo ddaayyss BB//oo..TTPPSS