Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

A.Ulaganathan Vs. the District Manager

A.Ulaganathan vs The District Manager

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 17, 2012
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/926532

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition (MD).No.1824 to 1828 of 2012 And Writ Petition (MD).Nos.1834 to 1843 of 2012 And M.P.(MD).Nos.1 to 3 of 2012
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information
Acts & sections
Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 - Rule 10; Tamil nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 - Section 9(4); Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 - Rule 16

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A.Ulaganathan

Advocate Mr.A.Jenasenan, Adv.

Respondent

The District Manager

Advocate Mr.M.Muniysamy, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 - Rule 10; Tamil nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 - Section 9(4); Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 - Rule 16

Excerpt

.....the entire grievance of the petitioners would be redressed.6. on noticing such submission and going through the material documents, mr.m.muniyasami, learned standing counsel for the respondent corporation requested time to take instructions.7. when the matters were taken up for hearing, the learned standing counsel for the respondent corporation, on instructions, informs that they are prepared to upload the tender schedule in the web site and the petitioners may download the same. he further informed that the petitioners have not approached the concerned respondent till such time.8. the learned counsel for the petitioners again informed that the petitioners are ready to go before the respondent or even to download the same from the web site.9. in the above stated position, instead of interfering with the tender notification, in order to meet the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to upload the tender documents to be made available to the petitioners in the light of the above act and rules on 17.02.2012 (friday) and also follow the relevant rules scrupulously.10. the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Full Judgment

Prayer

Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the tender notice dated 01.02.2012 made in Na.Ka.No.C.V.9/30/12 and quash the said proceedings dated 01.02.2012 and consequently directing the respondent to issue a fresh tender notice in terms of Rule 10(1) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 by inserting the tender conditions viz., obtaining the non objection certificate from the owner of the building situated adjoining IMFS shop No.11842 located at 31, 32 Municipal Shopping Comples, Shivan Koil North, Sivakasi, so as to enable the petitioner to participate in the tender after obtaining the tender application from the respondent.

COMMON ORDER

1. By consent, the writ petitions itself are taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

2. Heard Mr.A.Jenasenan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.M.Muniyasami learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

3. Challenging a tender notification floated by the respondent herein on 01.02.2012 inviting the applications to participate in respect of locating a bar adjacent to the IMFS shop, seeking to quash the said proceedings and for a consequential direction to the respondent to issue a fresh tender notice in terms of Rule 10(1) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops & Bars) Rules, 2003 by inserting the tender conditions, namely, obtaining 'no objection certificate' from the owner of the building situated adjoining to shops, the petitioners are before this Court.

4. Mr.A.Jenasenan, learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that under Section 9(4) of the Tamil nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998, the Tender Inviting Authority shall supply the schedule of rates and tender documents in such manner and in such places as may be prescribed to every intending tenderer who has applied for such document and also Rule 16 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 the Tender Inviting Authority shall make available the tender documents from the date of publication of the tender. Therefore, the notification is infirmed to the effect that till date the tender inviting authority has not upload or made available the tender documents to every tenderer including the petitioners.

5. After exhaustive arguments and discussions, the learned counsel for the petitioners would make a plea that if the respondent upload the tender forms in the Web Site, then the petitioners will be able to download the same and the entire grievance of the petitioners would be redressed.

6. On noticing such submission and going through the material documents, Mr.M.Muniyasami, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent corporation requested time to take instructions.

7. When the matters were taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent corporation, on instructions, informs that they are prepared to upload the tender schedule in the Web Site and the petitioners may download the same. He further informed that the petitioners have not approached the concerned respondent till such time.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners again informed that the petitioners are ready to go before the respondent or even to download the same from the Web Site.

9. In the above stated position, instead of interfering with the tender notification, in order to meet the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to upload the tender documents to be made available to the petitioners in the light of the above Act and Rules on 17.02.2012 (Friday) and also follow the relevant rules scrupulously.

10. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial