The High Court · 2025

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be. pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of l\ilandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in granting the tender in favour of the 4th respondent without satisfying the tender conditions in Tender No.D411457t2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent and also without considering the objections of the petitioner dated 12.,08.2025, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice, against Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and against all settled principles of law and consequently direct the respondents I to 3 not to proceed further in Tender No. D4h45712025, in the interest of justice $t' v lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c:i cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court me y be pleased to Direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to enter into any agreement witl the 4th respondent in pursuant to the Tender No. D41145712025 issued by the 2rrr respondent, pending disposal of main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI AKKAM ESHWAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI IMRAN KHAII REPRESENTING OFFICE OF ADDL ADVO(;, tTE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI M. BHARATH CHP,I DRA The Court made the following: ORDER I ) THE HON,BLE sRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRII'PETITION I{o.241 26 of2O25 ORDER: Petitioner challenges the tender process initiated under G.O.Ms.No. 16, dated 03.OZ.2O2S, wherein the 2.d respondent (District collector), as chajrrnan of the District purchase Committee (DpC), invited tenders for the supply of eggs to various Government institutions, excluding the Midday Meal Scheme. As per tender condition s, bidders had to submit valid experience certificates fcr egg supply worth of Rs.S crores in any one of the last three years, audited turnover of at least Rs.4 crores for each of the last three financial years (including 2024_25), and proof of delivery capacity to Anganwadi centres. while petitioner met all criteria and was awarded the tcnder in Aditabad District, the 4Lr, responde,t, despite iacking a valid experience certihcate from a competent authority, failing to submit turnover a,rd IT returns lbr 2024-25, and relying on questionable third_partv certilicates was awarded the tender in a,other clistrict by the 2nd respondent on 12.08.2025. The petitioner,s objections dated 12.Og.2O25 were ignored. It is alleged that the tender was awarded to the 4tr, respondent in collusion, violating Articles 14, lg, and 21 of the I Constitution ald the principles ol natural justic' Hence' this Writ r \ Petition.

2. Heard Mr.Akkam Eshwar, iearned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Imran Khan, learned counsel rep resenting Ofhce of theAdditionalAdvocateGenera]appearirgonbehalfof respondent Nos. I to 3 and Mr'M'Bharath Chandra' learned counsel for respondent No.4. Peruscd the recor< ' Learned counsel for Respondent No'4 filec

3. denying all allegations made by petitioner as stating that the tender process (Tender No l) conducted transparently arrd in lull cor-I conditions. It is submitted that Respondent l''i technical bid opened on 11'08'2025 and was in the financial bid opened on 12'O8'2O''2 objections raised thereafter are termed Respondent No 4 claims eligibility through a a counter affidavit alse and baseless, +1145712025) was pliance vvith the r.4 qualified in the leclared successful i. The Petitioner's an afterthought. va-lid Joint Venture with S. Mohal Reddy Poultry Farm, as permi-r ed under the tender rules, and submitted all required documents' certificates, audited turnover for previous vr: documents for 2024-25. The Tender Evalua 1 ncluding experienco rs, and provisional on Committee dulY .on"idTr"a the Joint Venture's ccmbined expt rience and caPacitY. I j ,^ Allegations of collusion and irregularities are denied, ald it is stated that the agre ement rvas lawfuily executed on 14 .Og.2O25 after farm inspection. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a reply affidavit denying that Respondent No.4 quatified in the technical bid or that objections were raised late, stating they were timely and va1id. It is submitted that Respondenl No.4 tailed to provide the required experience certificates, turnover, and IT returns for 2024_25 as per tender conditions. The alleged jcint venture with S.Mohan Reddy Poultry Farm is disputed, as there is no officiar recognition for experience or turnover. Turnover from third_part5r sales does not count as contract supply. Documents uploaded after the tender deadline are invarid, petitioner also alleges collusion between Respondent Nos.2 and 4 and claims the tender process lacked transparency. He further stated that uploading or submitting documents subsequent to crosure of tender rvourd be violation of the e-tender conditions.

5. Considering the submissions made by both learned counsel and a perusal of the records, this Court linds that the tender process was conducted in accorclance with the prescribed rules IE h'A'f-F "t! W.P. No.24126 of 2O2s and procedures. It rnay be noted that t!-ie z' , respondent's eligibility, including the joint venture arrangerr :nt, was duly examined and accepted by the Competent Auth I 'ity. It may be further noted that the petitioner has failed to provr 1e any credible evidence to establish collusion or procedural irrr gularities, and has made misleading averments to suit their case ald secure an order. Hence, this writ petition is liable to be dismi rsed with costs, as the petitioner did not approach this Court with < Iean hands.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed vith costs. The petitioner shal1 pay an amount ot Rs.1,0O,O0O/- t rrvards costs to the Court Masters and Persona,l Secretaries to thrr Hon'ble Judges Association, High Court for the State of Telar-tg,r ra, Hyderabad, within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of - :ceipt of copy of this order. Miscellaneous applications, if any pendir g, shall stand closed. MEMORANDUM OF COSTS W.P.NO.24126 0F 2025 Costs Quantified by Hon'ble Court (That the Petitioner herein are directed to pay costs of Rs.1 ,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh Only) to the Court lvlasters and Personal Secretaries to the Hon'ble Judges Association, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, within a period of six (06) Weeks from the date of order. - TOTAL RS. PS 1,00,000-00 |,00,000-00 //TRUE COPY// SD/. UI, JAWAHAR REDDY AS]J STANT BEGISTRAR ,,/;+ SE6TON OFFICER To, 1 The Secretary, The Court Masters and Personal Secretaries tr the Hon'ble Judges, Association, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderzll ad. ?ro I I I l HvderabadtOUTl ? gne CC to Sri Akkam Eshwar, Advocate tOpUCl 3. Two CC to The Advocate General, High C6urt forihe State of Telangana, at 4. Ohe CC to 'Sri 5. Two CD Copies TJ GJP Ml Bharath Chandra, Advocate[OpUC] 012 HIGH COURT DATED:2910812025 \ L ORDER WP.No.24126 ot 2025 6 -.1'.:::='- i, {ru;- sa,t\ l JrN 2026 o C) i) r.'ial, _ii)rqr.:r. ,j!6-1a;. \ :.:, . ''+q'. ! ' '-.;.:' DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS 0 6,l,(L +w .,.;,..,,i*#dH,t