IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND TEN WRIT PETITION No.15174 of 2010 Between: J.Saidulu Goud. … Petitioner And The Commissioner, Prohibition & Excise Department, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Putta Krishna Reddy for Sri Pottigari Sridhar Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Prohibition & Excise for R1 & R.2. None for R.3. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in accepting the bid of respondent No.3 for grant of A-4 license in respect of Shop G.SL.No.3 in Ward No.36 of Nalgonda Town and District, as illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, he has offered Rs.1,11,19,999-99 ps., while respondent No.3 has offered Rs.1,11,11,111/-, and despite his offer being higher than that of respondent No.3, the latter’s offer was accepted and license was granted to him. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is, inter alia, stated that though the petitioner in his tender form has quoted the figures Rs.1,11,19,999-99 ps., but in the words he has written as “one crore eleven lakhs nine thousands nine hundred ninety nine and ninety paisa”. It is further stated that on account of the discrepancy between the figures and the words, the amount written in words was taken into consideration, and, consequently, the offer made by respondent No.3 has been considered as higher than that of the petitioner. In the light of the said stand taken by the respondents, I do not find any illegality in rejecting the petitioner’s tender as the respondents are justified in relying on the words rather than the figures contained in the petitioner’s tender. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. -------------------------------------- --- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:03-8-2010 MNR