(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to 1) issue writ in the Nature of Mandamus Directing the Respondent No.3 to consider the objections/representation dated 30-12-2025 in the tender notification dated 21-10-2025, passed by the Respondent No.2, in so far the Kalaburagi Taluka is concerned, the copy of which is produced at Annexure-C.)

Oral Order

1. Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to accept notice for respondents.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents.

3. This petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to consider the objection/representation dated 30.12.2025 in the Tender Notification dated 21.10.2025 issued by respondent No.2 insofar as Kalaburagi taluk is concerned.

4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is doing the business of transportation, more specifically, in the area of transportation of food grains and supplies in the name of M/s. Bhosale Transport. Respondent No.2 Government through Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department issued Tender Notification on 21.10.2025 invited bids for retail transportation of food grains through e-tender notification for December-2026 to 22 taluks for supply of food grains. The petitioner having found himself eligible applied for the said tender for transportation with respect to Kalaburagi Taluk and District. The petitioner had raised certain objections to the tender evaluation committee with regard to one of the tender applicants namely, M/s.Lingraj S. Bukke having submitted undervalued and under stamped General Power of Attorney/Special Power of Attorney on Rs.100/- only instead of paying Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively, and requested the technical evaluation committee to consider the objections and take necessary action before clearing the technical evaluation of the tender applications.

5. It is contended that said M/s.Lingraj S. Bukke also participated in the earlier tender for similar work in which despite his ineligibility of similar technical bid was cleared in technical bid and later some of the applicants approached appellate authority due to which M/s.Lingraj S. Bukke was disqualified. However, later in order to accommodate the said person, issued a fresh tender without closing earlier tender process. Therefore, it is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No.3 will ignore the objections filed by other tender applicants against said M/s.Lingaraj S.Bukke.

6. It is the grievance of the petitioner that non- consideration of his representation dated 30.12.2025 will cause hardship and inconvenience to the petitioner and hence, having no other alternative remedy, he is before this Court. It is the grievance of the petitioner that if his objections are considered before clearing the technical bid, he would be satisfied.

7. Learned Additional Government Advocate representing the respondent-State contends that the objections, if any, filed by the petitioner would be taken into consideration if the technical bid of the tender is already not opened as on today at 03:08 PM.

8. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

          i. The writ petition is allowed.

          ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent No.3 to consider the objections/ representation dated 30.12.2025 in the Tender Notification dated 21.10.2025, if already not considered as on today at 03:08 PM restricted to Kalaburagi taluk.

          iii. The said representation will be considered and dealt with in accordance with law.

          iv. Since learned Additional Government Advocate is present before the Court physically, the order passed today by this Court shall be telephonically communicated to the concerned authorities forthwith.