logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 2451 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : W.A. No. 771 of 2026 & C.M.P.No. 7941 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SURENDER
Parties : Force Identification Pvt.Ltd, Rep. by its Director, R.T.Nagar, India Versus The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Chennai & Another
Appearing Advocates : For the Appellant: Nithesh Nataraj, M/s. Vaibhav Rangarajan Venkatesh, Advocates. For the Respondent: R2, P.S. Raman, Advocate General Assisted by S. Rajesh Government Advocate, R1, M. Suresh Kumar Additional Advocate General Assisted by U.M. Ravichandran Special Government Pleader.
Date of Judgment : 26-03-2026
Head Note :-
Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules - Rule 17(1) -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the impugned order dated 18.3.2026 passed in W.M.P.No. 12073 of 2026 in W.P.No. 11115 of 2026.)

S.M. Subramaniam, J.

1. The present Intra-Court Appeal has been instituted challenging the interim order passed by the Writ Court dated 18.03.2026 in W.M.P.No.12073 of 2026 in W.P.No.11115 of 2026.

2. The Writ Court, while declining to grant an interim stay, passed an interim order to the effect that any subsequent proceedings pursuant to the impugned E-Tender will be subject to the result of the writ petition. In the event of allowing the E-Tender to go on, the issues will become infructuous and therefore, the present appeal is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant would mainly contend that the Tender Notification came to be issued on 24.02.2026. However, a Corrigendum to the Original Notification was issued by the respondents on 20.03.2026, more specifically, after the Model Code of Conduct for election was implemented by the Election Commission of India in the entire State of Tamil Nadu with effect from 15.03.2026. The Corrigendum issued after the implementation of the Model Code of Conduct, on 20.03.2026 would show that the original conditions stipulated in the Tender Notification are substantially modified and the modifications are travelling beyond the scope as permitted under Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules. Thus, an interim stay of the Tender Notification is imminent for effective adjudication of the issues raised between the parties in the writ proceedings.

4. The learned Advocate General appearing for the State would strenuously oppose by stating that the Writ Court has already protected the interest of the parties stating that any subsequent actions pursuant to the impugned E-Tender will be subject to the result of the Writ Petition. That apart, the completion of E-Tender process will take some time and the Writ Petition itself is posted for final hearing by the learned Single Judge on 08.04.2026, and instead of arguing the main Writ Petition on the said day, the present Writ Appeal has been instituted, which is unnecessary.

5. The learned Advocate General would rely on Rule 17(1) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, and would contend that the modification issued through Corrigendum dated 20.03.2026 would fall within the ambit of Rule 17 of the said Rules, and thus, there is no infirmity in respect of the modifications issued.

6. Adjudication of these issues on merits at this stage is unnecessary in view of the fact that the Writ Petition is pending and yet to be adjudicated on merits. The Intra-Court Appeal has been instituted only against the interim order and to seek an absolute stay of the Tender Notification in order to protect the interest of the parties, and in the event of allowing the tender process to go on, it may cause prejudice to the parties, and the writ petition will become infructuous.

7. Further, it would be relevant to extract certain clauses notified in the Original Tender Notification dated 24.02.2026 as well as the modifications issued through Corrigendum on 20.03.2026. The relevant clauses, viz., 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 are extracted hereunder:-

               

                

                 

8. Relying on the above modification, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the conditions are changed in entirety and therefore, the modification cannot be construed as an amendment within the ambit of Rules. Considering the fact that the Writ Court has already listed the matter for final hearing on 08.04.2026, the parties to the lis are at liberty to raise their respective grounds for effective adjudication of issues before the learned Single Judge. However, in the interest of justice, there shall be an order of interim stay in respect of the tender process bearing Tender Reference No.7210/S4/2025 dated 23.02.2026, including the submission of bids, opening of technical bids, opening of financial bids, evaluation of bids, and issuance of any Letter of Award, till the disposal of the Writ Petition in W.P.No.11115 of 2026. The Writ Court is requested to dispose of the Writ Petition as expeditiously as possible.

9. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also disposed of.
 
  CDJLawJournal