✦ High Court of India · 24 Nov 2025

Asad Khan v. consequently direct the 2nd

Case Details High Court of India · 24 Nov 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
24 Nov 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,610 words

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 to direct the 2nd respondent to call for a fresh tender for the Shop No.8, lr/unicipal Complex, Opposite Fc,r'est tlffice, Khanapur by setting aside the tender held on 20-08-2024 vrde Notit caticn No Al/3212024 dt 13-08-2024 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending cisposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C.SHARAN REDDy Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC FOR MCPL WRIT PETITION NO: 3s690 OF 202s Between: Sharuq-Khan, S/o A,sad Khan, Aged about 31 years, Occ. Business, R/o. 29-18. Sai Nagar, Kh;:napur, Nirmal District. AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its principal Secretary, Municipal Adnrinistration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabati. Thr-. Khanapur tvlunrc pality, Nirmal District, Represented by its Commissioner Thr: Coornrissioner. Khanapur IVlunicipality, Nirmal District. 1 2 3 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ. order or direction more particularly one in lhe nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in conducting the tender, vide Notif rcation No.A113212024 dt.13lOBl2024 issued by the 2nd respondent for Shop No.9. Itlunicipal complex, opposite Forest office, Khanapur on 2010812024 without collecting the DD of Rs.60,000/- from the three other participants to the tender, which is a prerequisite to participate in the tender, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 1g of the constitution of lndia and consequently direct lhe 2nd respondent to call for a fresh tender for the shop No.9, [Vunicipal Complex, Opposite Forest Office, Khanapur by setting aside the aforesaid tender dt.20-08-2024, in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to direct the 2nd respondent to call for a fresh tender for the Shop No.9, tt4unicipal Complex, Opposite Forest Office, Khanapur by setting aside the tender held on 20-08-2024 vide Notification No.A'1/3212024 d1J3-08-2024 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C.SHARAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER ,1 l. THE HOI.'OUR;\BI-E SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRI'I P[l'IT'IO\ 1rros.356tl3 ANI) 3s690 0F 2025 COMMON ORI)f]R: (()R \l-) Siuce comrnon tssue is tnvolved in both the writ petitions, rvith the consenr ol' tl'rc both sides, they are being disposed of by this comrnon ordcr at the stage of admission itself.

2. W.P. r.No.i5(183 o12025 is raken as lead casc lbr disposal of thcse u,nt petitions

3. Brief facts in W.[). No.35683 of 2025 are as under:

3.1. 'lhis .,r,rit peririon is lilcd by thc petitioner seeking to declare the action ol- respondent No.? in conducting the tender vide Notification No..n 1i32i2024 dated 13.08.2024 in respect of the Shop No.8, I\4unicipal Complex, Opposite to Forest Office, Khanapur on 20 01i.2024, rvithour collecting Demand Draft (DD) fiom othcr two (2 ) participants, as being itlegal and arbitrary.

3.2 I lcard Mr. C. Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, leamed standing counsel lbr the Ir4 unicipa lities, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2 3 .3. It is submitted that respondent No.2 issued notification No.Al/3212024 dated 13.08.2024 tbr leasing out Shop No 9, Municipal Cornplex, Opposite Forest Office, Khanapur. As the petitioner rvas interestcd in the tender notification, he participated in the tender by paying Rs.60,0001 in the form of DD bearing No.001597 dated 19.08.2024. The tender was finalized on

20.08.2024, and the petitioner was declared successful bidder and Shop No.S rvas allotted to him by respondent No.2 on lease for a pcriod of three (3) years from 01.10.2024 ro 30.09.2027 for monthly rent of Rs.16,800/-. Subsequently, the petitioner entered into agreement with respondent No.3

3.4. It is stated that the petitioner had been paying rent regularly. However due to financial constraints, the petitioner failed in payments of rents to a tune of Rs.l ,17,600/- as on 3l .01 .2025 . lt is stated that subsequently the petitioner came to know that tender conducted on 20.08.2024 is not as per the rules. Two (2) applicants did not comply with the pre-requisite condition of payment of Rs.60,000/- towards DD for participating in the tender process. They have inflated the lease rent of the shop due to tI prot-essional rivalrr'. I'urther. tl-re petitioner ir as compelled to quote an exolbitanl rcnt ot' Rs. 16.800/- pe r Inonth tbr the said shop, whercas. thc rent in rhe preceditrg tcrrder was only Rs. 1,7601 per month. fhtrs, thc tettdet process is '"'itiated and liable to be set

3.5 Learned stancling counsel lor respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that thcre al-e no rrterits in the writ petitlon. T'hc petitioner with his e-"-cs wide open has participated in the tonder b1' quoting rent of Rs.16,800/- per month. Having participated in the lender and being successful, now the petitioner is coming up rt'ith strangc stories that the agreement is non- enfbrceable and such grounds carlnot be adjudicated in the writ petition particularll undcr Afticle 226 of the Constitution of India. l.(r 1'hc pctitioner was dcclared successful bidder pursuant to the noti f ication dated I :i .08.2024 issued by rcspondent No.2 The petitioncr rvas allotted Shop No.8 and thereafter agreement u,as entercd into for the lease period from 01.10.2024 to

30.09.2027. According to the petitioner, he was compelled to quote an cxorbitant rent ol RS,16.800/- per month, as two (2) : j i i I I i I I I i i : ! t arI I 4 persons who participated in the tender due to professional rivalry have inflatcd the lease amount of the shop. Further' the said two (2) persons have been allowed to participate in the tender without paying Earnest Money' Dcposit amount. 'Ihe allegations regarding violation of tendcr conditions are not only vague but also unsubstantiatcd. 'fhe said two (2) persons who are atlegedly allowed to pafticipato in the tender have not been made parties to this writ petition.

3.7 tt may bc noted that in the tender process open bidding was conducted and the petitioner participated in the tender and quoted Rs. 16,800/- as rent per month. If the lease amount was so exorbitant. there was no reason for the petitioner to quote such higher arnount. I[ other participants in the tender process have deliberately inflated the lease amount' it is un-understandable why the petitioner quoted morc amount. He could have as well withdrawn liom the tender. As the petitioner quoted the highest amount, he became the successful bidder. The petitioner now cannot turn around and allege irregularities, being the successful bidder )

4. I'he petitioners huve not rnade out any case and this Court is not an apt)ropriatc lirurn to tlecidc the 1is inr, olved in thcse rvrit petitions. l'here are no merits in thcse writ petitions

5. Accor.dingll', thc rvrit petitions are disrnissed. 'fhere shall be no order as to costs .A.s a sequel thercto, rliscellaneous applications, if any, pendirrg in these u,rit petitions stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// t- K. BHAVANI SWAMY STANT REGISTRAR FFICER 1 2 4 One CC to SRI C.SHARAN REDDY, Advocate [OFU One CC to SRI PUTTA KRTSHNA REDDY, SC FO I\4CPL [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR A/CPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderirbad [OUT] Two CD Copies BSR PVL -,<4) l i t I I I I i { I i i I : HIGH COURT DATED: 2411112025 o.J Y * r: l-i ,.i 2 3 il,t) ,\r t \P\ c) t COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.35683 & 35690 of 202 DISMISSING BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS, WITHOUT COSTS A t"P"l # >tl>\u

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments