Nos.193 and 194 of 2026 RK.Brothers Engineering WorksRepresented by its Managing Partner v. The Commissioner
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. According to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the second respondent has not been qualified as per the tender notification.2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.206 of 20264. These submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel would clearly indicate that the petitioner is being aggrieved…
Judgment
W.P.(MD).No.206 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 06.01.2026CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMARW.P(MD)No.206 of 2026andW.M.P(MD) Nos.193 and 194 of 2026RK.Brothers Engineering WorksRepresented by its Managing Partner, Franklin RajeshkumarSamuvelHaving office atNo.2/3, Nammalvar Street, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. ... PetitionerVs.
The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Municipal Corporation, 113, ThamilzhSalai (Palai Road) Thoothukudi – 628 002.
M/s.RSK Construction and Projects, 121, Thirumurugan Nagar, Veeriyampalayam Road, Kalapatti Post, Coimbatore – 641 048. ... RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Notice Inviting Tenders (NIT) in Contract No.E1/00049/2025 issued by the 1st Respondent for the work of
Widening, Construction of RCC Lined Canal with Retaining Wall and RCC solid bridge for buckle canal chainnage from 250.00 M to 7140.00 M (Theraspuram 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.206 of 2026 Bridge to FCI Godown) in Thoothukudi City Municipal Corporation
as the same is against the rules of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the 1st respondent issue fresh tender notification. For Petitioner: Mr.V.P.Senguttuvel Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Muthu KamatchiFor R1: Mr.N.Anandhakumar Standing CounselO R D E RThe present writ petition has been filed seeking to challenge a tender notification issued by the first respondent/Municipal Corporation on 07.11.2025 on the ground that it is against the Rules of Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998.2. A perusal of the records reveal that the petitioner has not participated in the tender process and the second respondent has been declared as L-1 in the said process.
According to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the second respondent has not been qualified as per the tender notification.2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.206 of 20264. These submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel would clearly indicate that the petitioner is being aggrieved over the declaration of second respondent as L-1 in the tender process.5. In view of the above said facts, it is clear that the present writ petition has been filed not to espouse the cause of the writ petitioner but challenging the selection of the second respondent as L-1 by the first respondent. In such a view of the matter, the present writ petition is not maintainable and the same is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a Public Interest Litigation, if he is so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 06.01.2026NCC: Yes/No Index :Yes / NoInternet: Yes / Noebsi3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.206 of 2026To1. The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Municipal Corporation, 113, ThamilzhSalai (Palai Road) Thoothukudi – 628 002.2. M/s.RSK Construction and Projects, 121, Thirumurugan Nagar, Veeriyampalam Road, Kalapatti Post, Coimbatore – 641 048.4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.206 of 2026R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.ebsiW.P(MD)No.206 of 202606.01.20265/5
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.