THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10287 OF 2006 ORAL ORDER: The writ petitioner claims to be a licensed electrical contractor. It is stated that the petitioner-firm has been carrying on temporary illumination works in the premises of the Exhibition Society for the purpose of fish medicine distribution programme for the past several years at the rates approved by the Exhibition Society. The petitioner claims that since it is an authorized contractor of the Exhibition Society for the supply of electrical material, temporary illumination etc., on a request made by the Exhibition Society, the 1st respondent has been allotting the work of illumination to the petitioner-firm and, accordingly, the petitioner has been executing the works. While so, the 3rd respondent-Superintendent Engineer, Roads & Buildings, issued tender notice dated 8.5.2006 inviting tenders for providing temporary illumination for distribution of fish medicine on 8.6.2006 and 9.6.2006 at Exhibition Grounds, Nampally, Hyderabad. The said tender notice has been challenged in this writ petition contending that the action of the respondents in inviting tenders for providing temporary illumination, without entrusting the work to the petitioner on nomination basis, as was being done for the past several years, is arbitrary and illegal. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material on record, I am afraid that the writ as prayed for cannot be granted on any of the grounds raised by the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the necessary temporary illumination is being provided by the State Government to avoid inconvenience to the general public availing the fish medicine programme every year. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Electrical Engineer (GI), R & B Department, on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that during the audit inspection on the works of the Electrical Engineer (GI), R & B Office, the A.G. Audit Party raised an objection with regard to providing temporary lighting arrangements on nomination basis without inviting tenders thereby, causing loss to the Government exchequer. The rates fixed by the Exhibition Society for providing temporary illumination at Exhibition Grounds are far higher than the approved rates of R & B Department. It is also stated that the Exhibition Society is only a lessee of the Government land and that the agreement, if any, entered by the Exhibition Society with the petitioner-firm shall be only for the works related to the Exhibition Society. So far as the work in question is concerned, the Government is bound to follow the objective standards for the purpose of selecting the electrical contractor and, therefore, the impugned tender notice was issued so as to entrust the work to the lowest tenderer. It needs no reiteration that for the purpose of distribution of State largesse, it is always desirable to adopt a fair and transparent procedure by inviting sealed tenders or by conducting public auction so as to comply with the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Hence, I do not find any justifiable reason to find fault with the procedure adopted by the respondents in inviting sealed tenders for grant of the work in question. At any rate, it is clear from the counter-affidavit that the tenders, which were received in sealed covers, were opened on 23.5.2006 and the work was already entrusted to one M/s Agarwal Electricals, who was the lowest tenderer. Viewed from any angle, I do not find any substance in the contentions of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain permanent structures raised by the petitioner are in existence in the premises of the Exhibition Society and that the respondents may be directed not to disturb the same. It is always open to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation before the respondents with such request, in which event, the same will be considered by the respondents and appropriate action will be taken. ______________ (G. ROHINI, J.) 5th June, 2006. Kgr Issue CC in two days. THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10287 OF 2006 5th June, 2006. Between: M/s Hazi Mohammed Yasin, Represented by M.A. Kaleem, R/o H.No.22-6-339, Koonche Naseem, Miralam Mandi, Hyderabad. .. Petitioner. And The Principal Secretary to Government, Roads and Buildings Department, Governemnt of A.P., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and three others. .. Respondents.