P.Annadurai v. P.Baskaran

ORDER

Seeking to review the order passed in W.P.No.6338 of 2026, the petitioner has filed the present review petition as a third party.

¶2The review petition has been filed on the ground that the review petitioner, who was the successful bidder, had not been impleaded as a party to the writ petition and there has been total suppression on the part of the writ petitioner as well the respondents.

¶3The writ petition had been filed to quash the Tender Summary Report dated 13.02.2026, which was communicated to the petitioner on

14.02.2026, and to direct the 2nd respondent to award the tender in his favour. It was represented before this Court that, after confirmation of the writ petitioner's Page3 of 5 technical bid and he being the lowest bidder, his bid had been rejected without any reason. Therefore, this Court, taking note of the letter dated 13.02.2026 issued by the Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem wherein it was stated that the work experience certificate issued by the writ petitioner was genuine and had been verified on the basis of the records available in his office and without going into the merits of the case, had directed the 3rd respondent to consider the writ petitioner's financial bid.

¶4However, what has transpired is that, by relying upon the order of this Court, the contract has been awarded to the writ petitioner. What has not been brought to the notice of this Court is the fact that the writ petitioner's bid had been rejected twice, whereas the review petitioner's bid had been accepted on both occasions, and the Tender Scrutiny Committee, by its Minutes dated

13.02.2024, had declared the review petitioner as L1 and recommended him to the competent authority. A communication to this effect was also sent by the Superintending Engineer, Highways Circle, to the Chief Engineer recommending award of the tender in favour of the review petitioner. These facts were not brought to the notice of this Court, as is evident from a reading of the order. That apart, the successful bidder had not been made a party to the proceedings. Had the review petitioner been impleaded, these facts would have been brought to the notice of this Court. Page4 of 5

¶5In view of the above, this Court is satisfied that sufficient grounds have been made out to review the order passed in W.P.No.6338 of 2026. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed and W.P.No.6338 of 2026 is restored to file. The writ petition shall be posted before the learned Judge concerned as per the roster. In the meanwhile, the contract awarded pursuant to the order passed in the writ petition shall be kept in abeyance till the writ is taken up for hearing. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 11-03-2026 SRN To:

¶1The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

¶2The Superintendent Engineer Highways Department, Construction Maintenance, Steel Plant Road, Jahirammapalayam, Salem 636 302

¶3The Tender Scrutiny Committee Highways Department, Steel Plant Road, Jahirammapalayam, Salem 636 302. REV.APLWoNo.o53oofo2026 P.T.ASHAoJ. SRN REV.APLWoNo.o53oofo2026 AND WMPoNO.o10149oOFo2026,WMPoNO.o10150oOFo2026 11-03-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA AND WMP NO. 10149 & 10150 of 2026 P.Annadurai Son of Pachaiappa Gounder 25A Kaliappa Gounder St., Dharmapuri. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. P.Baskaran S/o Pachaiappan, Engineering Contractor, No 41/2, 1st Cross Street, Nedumaran Nagar, Dharmapuri. 2. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009. 3. The Superintendent Engineer Highways Department, Construction Maintenance, Steel Plant Road, Jahirammapalayam,Salem 636 302 4. The Tender Scrutiny Committee Highways Department, Steel Plant Road, Jahirammapalayam, Salem 636 302. ..Respondent(s) Page2 of 5 Prayer: Review Petition has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1, r/w. 114 of C.P.C to review the final order dated 18.02.2026 in W.P.No.6338 of 2026. For Petitioner: Mr.Sharath Chandran For Respondents: Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, Senior Counsel for Mr.Aswin Prasanna for R1 Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, Additional Government Pleader for R2 to R4