Karnataka High Court
Sri. N Nagaraja vs University Of Agirucltural ... on 9 June, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT APPEAL NO. 639 OF 2023 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
SRI. N. NAGARAJA
S/O LATE NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
R/O No.493, 18TH MAIN, 27TH CROSS,
JUDICIAL LAYOUT
YELAHANKA
BENGALURU - 560 065.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BHANUPRAKASH V G., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by AND:
SUMA B N
Location: 1. UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
High NAIK BHAVAN
Court of GANDHI KRISHI VIGNANAN KENDRA
Karnataka BENGALURU -560 065
REPRESENTED BY ITS
DEAN STUDENT WELFARE
2. THE ESTATE OFFICER
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
NAIK BHAVAN
GANDHI KRISHI VIGNANAN KENDRA
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
BENGALURU - 560 065.
3. BHUMIKA DIGITAL COPIER
NO.21, 3RD CROSS
MSR NAGAR, MATHIKERE
BENGALURU - 560 054
REPRESENTED BY
MANJUNATHA H.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO i) TO ALLOW THE
ABOVE WRIT APPEAL, BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP 21825/2022, DATED
16.05.2023. ii) TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED
FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, M.G.S.KAMAL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This writ appeal is filed against the order dated
16.05.2023 passed in W.P.No.20944/2022 (GM-RES)
clubbed with writ petition No.21825/2022 (GM-TEN) by
which the writ petitions filed by the appellant were
dismissed.
2. The above writ petition in W.P.No.20944/2022
was filed by the appellant challenging the eviction notice
issued by first respondent/Estate Officer of University of
Agriculture Science and writ petition in
W.P.No.21825/2022 is filed by the appellant challenging
certain minutes of meeting dated 05.09.2022 in terms of
which the University had decided to issue tender
notification in respect of Shop Premises where the
appellant is running business for over ten years in favour
of Respondent No.3. It is the case of the appellant that
pursuant to a tender notification dated 29.08.2012
appellant having emerged as a successful bidder/H1 on
26.10.2012 has been occupying and running a
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
photocopying and job typing shop in shop No.5 at the
University Campus. That he was awarded a contract
initially for a period of 11 months and thereafter every two
years upon issuance of fresh tender notification he has
been successful bidder. That in the notification issued for
the year 2021-22 one Bhumika Digital Copier respondent
No.3 in W.P.No.21825/2022 has emerged as successful
bidder. Accordingly, a notice has been issued to the
appellant calling upon him to vacate the premises on
17.10.2022 as the said premises has been allotted to the
respondent No.3 Bhumika Digital Copier. Aggrieved by the
same, the appellant is before this Court by filing aforesaid
two petitions.
3. The appellant has also contended that merely
because the bid of the respondent No.3 is higher the same
cannot be the only ground for allotment of the shop as the
appellant has been in possession of the same for over a
period of ten years.
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
4. After having heard counsel for the parties
learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition declining
to interfere with the tender process. Aggrieved by the
same the appellant is before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant reiterating the
grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal submitted
that the minimum eligibility criteria has been set out in
tender guidelines which requires an applicant to submit
their experience certificate and permission letter issued by
the competent authority which respondent No.3 has not
complied with. That since respondent No.3 does not meet
the eligibility criteria, mere quoting of bid amount higher
than the appellant would not make it entitle for the shop
premises. That appellant has been running the business
since 1996 and has been the successful bidder since 2010
and all these aspects have not been considered by the
learned Single Judge. Hence, seeks for allowing of the
appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
6. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
perused the records.
7. Learned Single Judge has taken note of the
contentions of the appellant with regard to respondent
No.3 not submitting the rental agreement and the
experience certificate along with tender document and also
taken note of the fact that third respondent had indeed
submitted rental agreement and experience certificate
appended to tender documents along with the statement
of objections. Thus, since the said contention of the
appellant has been answered, learned Single Judge has
held the same to be untenable. As regards the issue of bid
of respondent No.3 to be the highest bidder, the learned
Single Judge has observed since the University has been
renting out its shops to eligible tenderers through tender
notification every year, who ever bids high would be the
successful bidder. Taking note of the highest bid amount
and the fact that the bid amount of the petitioner is lower
by Rs.1,200/- learned Single Judge has held that the
NC: 2023:KHC:19820-DB
WA No. 639 of 2023
appellant being the second highest bidder cannot claim
any monopoly to run the business.
In the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter, the
appellant has not made out any grounds to interfere with
the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence,
appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SBN/RU
