Karnataka High Court
Sri.Rama Enterprises vs Superintending Engineer Elec on 10 March, 2023
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
WP No. 18091 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 18091 OF 2021 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. RAMA ENTERPRISES
REPT. BY ITS PROPRIETOR
N. NARAYANASWAMY
S/O NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA,
1ST FLOOR, P C HALLI,
CHOWDESHWARINAGARA,
KOLAR, KARNATAKA-563 101.
2. S.T.S. ELECTRICALS
REPT. BY ITS PROPRIETOR
NEERAJAKSHANAIDU G
S/O G NAGARAJA NAIDU
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
PADMAVATHI B K
SHRINGERI MUTT STREET,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF MULABAGAL,
KARNATAKA KOLAR, KARNATAKA-563 131.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAMOD REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER ELEC.,
TRANSMISSION (MAINTENANCE),
BRAZ, KPTCL,
-2-
WP No. 18091 of 2021
BENGALURU.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
TENDER NOTIFICATION BEARING DTD. 25.02.2021 VIDE
ANNX-B ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would in
unison submit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the
judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.No.65/2021 and
connected cases disposed on 06.12.2022.
2. This Court in the aforesaid writ petition has passed
the following order:
"14. The other circumstance is that the order of
the coordinate Bench, as observed hereinabove, was
challenged in Writ Appeal No.313 of 2020 (KARNATAKA
STATE SHIFT DUTIES AND MAINTENANCE ELECTRICAL
CONTRACTORS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA). The Division
Bench by its judgment dated 07-04-2022 rejects the
appeal affirming the order of the coordinate
Bench. The observations that are germane and would
WP No. 18091 of 2021
touch upon the contentions advanced in the case at hand
in the judgment of the Division Bench are as follows:
".... .... ....
5. We have carefully considered the rival
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties
and gone through the material on record.
6. Regulation 29 of the Regulations reads
thus :
29. Precautions to be adopted by
consumers, owners, occupiers,
electrical contractors, electrical
workmen and suppliers. - (1) No
electrical installation work, including
additions, alterations, repairs and
adjustments to existing installations, except
such replacement of lamps, fans, fuses,
switches, domestic appliances of voltage not
exceeding 250V and fittings as in no way
alters its capacity or character,shall be
carried out upon th premises of or on behalf
of any consumer, supplier, owner or
occupier for the purpose of supply to such
consumer, supplier, owner or occupier
except by an electrical contractor
licensed in this behalf by the State
Government and under the direct
supervision of a person holding a certificate
of competency and by a person holding a
permit issued or recognized by the State
Government.
Provided that in the case of works
executed for or on behalf of the Central
Government and in the case of installations
in mines, oil fields, and railways, the
Central Government and in other cases the
State Government, may, by notification in
the Official Gazette, exempt on such
conditions as it may impose, any such work
described therein either generally or in the
case of any specified class of consumers,
suppliers, owners or occupiers.
WP No. 18091 of 2021
(2) No electrical installation work which has
been carried out in contravention of sub-
regulation (1) shall either be energized or
connected to the works of any supplier.
7. The aforesaid provision only deals with
electrical installation work, only by the electrical
contractors who have license. The work of
electrical installation is not assigned to the
manpower agency but it will be assigned only to
the contractors. Under the Regulations the
Corporation has nominated Nodal Officers as
Electrical Safety Officers for ensuring observance
of safety measures for operation and maintenance
of substations as prescribed in the Regulations.
The circular provides for preparation of tender
documents for hiring personnel through manpower
agencies for carrying out shift operations and
maintenance of substations under the supervision
of the Nodal Officers of the Corporation. There are
no electrical installation works to be carried out by
manpower agency. The learned Single Judge
referring to Regulation 3.3 and 7 of the
Regulations and rightly held that these
regulations do not apply to the fact situation of the
case. The manpower agencies are not carrying out
electrical installation work either in violation of
Electricity Act or the Regulations. The qualified
Engineers and Diploma holders shall ensure that
safety measures for operation and maintenance
are undertaken as prescribed under Regulation 7 of
the Regulations.
8. As the appellant/petitioner is also allowed
to participate in the tender process as observed by
the learned Single Judge, which is based on the
statement of objections of second and third
respondents, it will not amount to discrimination or
violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution
of India. The appellant/petitioner should only have
to ensure that they have to be registered with EPF
and ESI scheme. Copy of the work orders furnished
by second and third respondents will reveal that
the tender has been processed and work order has
been issued to the electrical contractors also who
WP No. 18091 of 2021
participated in the tender process. Therefore, the
contention of the learned counsel for the appellant
that the appellant/petitioner cannot participate in
the tender process as they are not registered
company has no substance. The learned Single
Judge has taken into consideration all contentions
of the appellant/petitioner and rightly dismissed
the petition. The order passed by the learned
Single Judge is a reasoned order and does not call
for any interference by this Court. Hence, writ
appeal is dismissed."
(Emphasis supplied)
The Division Bench considers that the coordinate Bench
referring to Regulations 3.3 and 7 has rightly held that
the Regulations do not apply to the fact situation. The
manpower agency does not carry out any electrical
installation work for the circular to be in violation of
Electricity Act or the Regulations. Paragraph 8 of the said
judgment supra captures the entire issue and holds that
the appellants therein could not have participated in the
tender process as it was restricted to manpower agencies
and that being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution
was negatived.
15. Therefore, the submissions broadly are all
negatived by the coordinate Bench as affirmed by the
Division Bench. Regulation 29 which is considered by the
Division Bench clearly permits such play in the joints to
the Corporation. Therefore, on a conjoint reading of
Regulations 3.3, 7 and 29 all of which bear consideration
at the hands of the coordinate Bench and the Division
Bench, would definitely stare at the contentions
advanced by the learned senior counsel for the
petitioners. Therefore, any deeper delving into the
matter is not available at the hands of this Court for the
afore-quoted becoming a binding precedent for this Court
to hold otherwise, failing which, judicial discipline would
be shaken, as there is no extenuating circumstance that
is projected by the petitioners that would warrant any
deviation from what is held by the coordinate Bench or
the Division Bench.
WP No. 18091 of 2021
16. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions
lacking in merit would necessarily meet their dismissal
and are accordingly dismissed.
Consequently, pending applications also stand disposed."
Placing the submission on record, the petition is disposed
in the very same terms as afore-quoted.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JY
