Bombay High Court
Cineom Broadcast India Ltd. And Another vs The Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 19 October, 2022
Author: R.D. Dhanuka
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka
Digitally signed by
JAYARAJAN JAYARAJAN
ANJAKULATH ANJAKULATH NAIR
NAIR Date: 2022.10.21
17:50:25 +0530
1/3 911 WP(L)-32570.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.32570 OF 2022
Cineom Broadcast India Limited & Anr. ] ... Petitioners
Vs.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater ]
Mumbai & Ors. ] ... Respondents
...
Mr. Venkatesh R. Dhond, senior counsel with Mr. S.S. Jan i/b
M/s. Crawford Bayley & Co. for the petitioners.
Mr. Burhan Bukhari with Ms. Rupali Adhate i/b Mr. Sunil
Sonawane for respondent Nos.1 to 3-MCGM.
Mr. Indersingh Kadakoti, Deputy Education Officer, Education
Department, MCGM, is present in the court.
...
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATED : 19TH OCTOBER, 2022.
P.C.:-
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Mr. Bukhari, learned counsel waives service for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
AJN
2/3 911 WP(L)-32570.22.odt
2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a declaration that the order dated 26/08/2022 and any actions, orders or steps consequential thereto, are unconstitutional, ultra vires, non-est and bad in law and for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the order dated 26/08/2022.
3. The Municipal Corporation has invited tenders on 17/01/2022. The petitioners were the successful bidders in respect of the said tender. The order passed by the Municipal Corporation was challenged by one Valuable Edutainment Pvt. Ltd., who was an unsuccessful bidder, on various grounds, in a writ petition being Writ Petition (L) No.23311 of 2022. The said writ petition was heard from time to time on various dates i.e. on 25/07/2022, 05/08/2022, 18/08/2022 and on 26/08/2022. The arguments were concluded on 26/08/2022 and the petition was closed for orders.
4. Mr. Dhond, learned senior counsel has invited our attention to the various steps taken by the Municipal Corporation, on the complaint filed by a local MLA, to cancel the tender already invited, to which the petitioners were declared as L-1. It appears that on the basis of the said complaint received from a local MLA, the Municipal Corporation ultimately cancelled the tender on the grounds that were totally contrary to the arguments advanced before this Court, justifying their action of accepting AJN 3/3 911 WP(L)-32570.22.odt the bid of the petitioners while opposing the petition filed by Valuable Edutainment Private Limited.
5. In our view, the action on the part of the Municipal Corporation in cancelling the tender after opposing the petition of Valuable Edutainment Private Limited and justifying their action in accepting the tender of the petitioners herein is ex facie malafide. Respondent No.1 being a public body is expected to save public money instead of taking such contradictory stands at different times on the basis of some complaints received from somebody.
6. Interim reliefs are granted in terms of prayer clauses (d) and (e). Hearing of the petition is expedited.
[KAMAL KHATA, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.] AJN