Valluru Sreedhar Naidu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, State Waqf Board Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Imadadghar Building, Vijayawada And 3 Others

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.

The 1st respondent issued a tender notification dated 07.07.2021 calling for the sealed tender for different categories of items. The notification related to the 1st category is for 17 items and the appellant is found to be the highest bidder in the said tender process. However, the Muzawars of the Wakf Institution filed W.P.No.16517 of 2021 before this Court challenging the said tender process. By virtue of the orders of this Court dated 09.08.2021, the 17 items were broken up into two categories of “A” & “B”. The item Nos.1 to 12 were categorised as “Category-A” and item Nos.13 to 17 were categorised as “Category-B”. But the appellant was awarded with the contract for items 1 to 12 in the “Category A”. The tender relating to the items 13 to 17 was kept in abeyance. Subsequently the earlier W.P.No.16517 of 2021 was dismissed as withdrawn on 05.12.2022. Then the appellant submitted the representation, dated 22.12.2022 requesting the 1st respondent to finalise the tender process in relation to the item Nos.13 to 17 belonging to “Category-B” on the ground that there was no response from the 1st respondent, the appellant filed W.P.No.1546 of 2023 before this Court and the same was disposed of vide order dated 02.02.2023 directing the 1st respondent-Wakf Institution to consider the issue of finalization of the tender process within a period of six weeks. The 3rd respondent issued the proceedings dated 10.03.2023 in which, it was stated that, the request of the appellant and as well as the Muzawars of the Wakf Institution is considered and the 1st respondent decided to cancel the tender in relation to items 13 to 17 on the ground that, there has been an escalation of prices and the tender floated earlier would not be appropriate to go on and as such issuance of fresh tender is required. Aggrieved by the decision of the 1st respondent, the appellant filed W.P.No.6998 of 2023 before this Court against which, this Writ Appeal is filed.

While considering the matter on merits by the learned Single Judge, it was observed that, the petitioner therein was not yet awarded the contract and the award of the contract was kept pending on account of the litigation initiated earlier by the Muzawars. The decision of the Board is that, in view of the passage of time and escalation of prices it is not beneficial for the institution to proceed with the old tender with respect to the remaining items. Thus the learned Single Judge found that, the decision of the Wakf Institution is not arbitrary and unreasonable.

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 04.05.2023 assailing the same, this Writ Appeal was filed. For the foregoing reasons, this Court also does not find any merit in this Writ Appeal.

Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.