*HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY +W.P.No.6592 of 2011 % 5-11-2011 # Somasundaram Memorial Social, Educational Rural Development Society, Represented by its President V.S. Chandra Sekhar Mamillagudem, Khammam .. Petitioner And $ The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Represented by its Regional Manager, Khammam .. Respondent <GIST: >HEAD NOTE : ! Counsel for petitioner : Sri M.M.M. Srinivasa Rao for Sri Kowturu Vinayakumar ^ Counsel for respondent : Ms. K. Vijaya for Sri Sridhar Reddy Pottigari, Standing Counsel for APSRTC ?CASES REFERRED : Nil HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.6592 of 2011 Date : 5-11-2011 Between : Somasundaram Memorial Social, Educational Rural Development Society, Represented by its President V.S. Chandra Sekhar Mamillagudem, Khammam .. Petitioner And The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Represented by its Regional Manager, Khammam .. Respondent Counsel for petitioner : Sri M.M.M. Srinivasa Rao for Sri Kowturu Vinayakumar Counsel for respondent : Ms. K. Vijaya for Sri Sridhar Reddy Pottigari, Standing Counsel for APSRTC The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in not considering the petitioner’s tender filed in response to tender notice No.M1/122(1)/2011- RM:KMM, dated 19-2-2011 for maintenance of toilets and bus stations (sweeping and cleaning) located in Khammam District, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner is a Society registered under A.P. (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act 1350 Fasli (for short “the 1350 Fasli Act”) with registration No.2268/97. In response to the tender notification issued by the respondent for the above mentioned work, the petitioner filed its tender. According to it, it has offered Rs.12,802/-. The petitioner alleged that while rejecting its tender, the respondent is trying to accept the tender of another agency which quoted only Rs.4000/- per month. Assailing the said action, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. On behalf of the respondent, its Law Officer filed a counter-affidavit wherein it is inter alia stated that as per condition No.6 of the tender notification dated 19-2-2011, the societies registered under A.P. (Telangana Area) Public Registration Act, 1860 and A.P. Societies Registration Act 2001 (for short “the 2001 Act”) are alone eligible to participate and that the registration shall be made only in the name of the firm. It is further stated that the petitioner did not fulfill the above mentioned condition regarding registration of the society as it is not registered under either of the two Acts referred to above and that therefore the tender committee has not considered the petitioner’s tender as valid. The respondent has not disputed the fact that the petitioner has been registered under the 1350 Fasli Act. Section 32(1) of the 2001 Act repealed the Societies Registration Act 1860 and the 1350 Fasli Act. Sub-section (2) thereof however provided that anything done or any action taken under the said Acts (including any order, rule, regulation, certificate or bye-laws) in the exercise of any power conferred by or under the said Acts shall be deemed to have been done or taken in the exercise of the powers conferred by or under the 2001 Act as if the said Act was in force on the date on which such a thing was done or action taken. As a result of the said statutory provision, the registration of the petitioner under the 1350 Fasli Act is deemed to have been done under the 2001 Act. The respondent has overlooked this indisputable position of law. Therefore, the action of the respondent in treating the petitioner’s tender as not valid cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly declared as illegal. The respondent is therefore directed to consider the petitioner’s tender along with the other tenders and finalise the same strictly in accordance with the tender conditions. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. As a sequel, interim order dated 15-3-2011 is vacated and WPMP No.8198/2011 is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 5-11-2011 AM