IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26643 of 2010 Between: N. Masthan Rao, S/o.Rathaiah, aged 62 years, R/o.Flat No.G-1, Krishnalok Apartments, H.No.8-3- 825/5/9G, Yellareddyguda, HYDERABAD, and another … Petitioners And The State Warehousing Corporation (Govt. of A.P. Undertaking), rep. by its Managing Director, 2nd Floor, Warehousing Sadhan, Hyderabad – 500 001, and others … Respondents Order: Petitioners have questioned notification dated 04-10- 2010 issued by the respondents-A.P. State Warehousing Corporation; vide Tender No.SWC/B4/H&T- OG/Tender/1354/2010 inviting tenders for handling and transportation of goods from the warehouses mentioned therein and also amended notification dated 18-10-2010 extending the date of opening of tenders upto 01-11-2010. It is the case of the petitioners that they have entered into an agreement with the respondents for preservation and maintenance of goods and have also requested for giving contract even for handling and transportation on permanent basis. It is their grievance that though they made such request, respondents have issued the impugned notifications inviting sealed tenders without considering their claim. It is to be seen that the contract of handling and transportation has nothing to do with preservation and maintenance contract which is held by the petitioners. Merely because the General Manager of the respondents-Corporation addressed letter dated 21-07-2010 to the third respondent- General Manager, Food Corporation of India (A.P. Region), recommending to allot handling and transportation to the petitioners, that by itself is no ground to invalidate the impugned notifications. The general rule, when contracts such as those herein are issued, is to invite tenders, but not otherwise. As the impugned notifications are issued inviting tenders from interested parties for handling and transportation of goods, I do not find any illegality in the said notifications, to interfere with the tender process. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) October 27, 2010 MRR