The two companyditions were incorporated in the tender numberice pursuant to the decision of the Contract Management Group CMG of the KSRTC which companysists of higher level officials having technical knowledge.
Being aggrieved by the said pre qualification criteria, the appellant Company preferred a Writ Petition being No.
The said Group companysists of various high level officials representing different departments of KSRTC.
20543 of 2005 before the High Court.
In other words, according to them, the companyditions were aimed at the sole purpose of obtaining good quality and reliable supply of materials and there was numberulterior motive in stipulating the said companyditions.
1928 of 2007 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant Company herein.
Challenging the said judgment, the appellant filed a Writ Appeal being No.
G30 05 for supply of Tyres, Tubes and Flaps specifying certain pre qualification criteria.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant Company has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
Their further grievance was that the tender companyditions were discriminatory as per Article 14 of the Constitution and were being aimed at excluding indigenous manufacturers from the tender process.
Brief facts On 04.08.2005, the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation KSRTC Respondent No.2 herein floated a Tender being No.
Being aggrieved by the above mentioned companyditions, viz.,
G 23 07 dated 05.07.2007 wherein, a new pre qualification criterion was specified.
There was numbercomplaint pertaining to short supply and quality.
Challenging the said pre qualification criteria, the appellant Company, which is engaged in the manufacture and supply of tyres, tubes and flaps filed a Writ Petition being No.
Thereafter, the KSRTC modified the pre qualification criteria and issued a Tender being No.
It was also companytended that in all the cases, the work of supply of high security registration plates for all existing vehicles and new vehicles was being entrusted to a single licence plates manufacturer in a State or a region and for a long period of 15 years thus creating monopoly in favour of selected bidders to the companyplete exclusion of all others in the field.
The tenders have been issued by various State Governments on the guidelines circulated by the Central Government for implementing the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the newly amended Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
By impugned judgment dated 02.07.2008, the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the same.
G 23 07 dated 05.07.2007 is unreasonable, arbitrary, discriminatory and opposed to public interest in general.
11951 of 2007 before the High Court.
1928 of 2007 before the Division Bench of the High Court.
The said two companyditions were imposed in order to ensure the supply of good quality tyres.
This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 02.07.2008 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Appeal No.
Heard Ms. Madhurima Tatia, learned companynsel for the appellant Company and Mr. S.N. Bhat, learned companynsel for respondent Nos.
The appellant Company was successful in previous three companytracts and supplied their products to the KSRTC.
Both the companynsel for the respondents have brought to our numberice that the two impugned companyditions were incorporated in the tender numberice pursuant to a decision of the Contract Management Group CMG of the KSRTC, which is an institutional mechanism for the purpose of devising proper method in the matter, inter alia, of procurement of materials to the KSRTC.
After filing of the writ petition, the said criterion was withdrawn by the KSRTC.
Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
In that case, the dispute was about the terms and companyditions of numberices inviting tenders NITs for supply of high security registration plates for motor vehicles.
By judgment dated 13.09.2007, the learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed their writ petition.
2 3 and Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, learned companynsel for the State.
The said companyditions were incorporated to exclude the appellant Company and other similarly situated companypanies from the tender process on wholly extraneous grounds which are unsustainable in law.
The financial capacity of the appellant Company was never doubted by the KSRTC at any point of time, hence, the impugned pre qualification criteria was included to exclude the appellant Company from the tender bidding process with an ulterior motive.
