K.Swaminathan, v. The Chairman,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.11.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.13739, 13740, 13829 and 13830 of 2017 K.Swaminathan ... Petitioner in both W.Ps. versus

¶1The Chairman, TANGEDCO, Chennai.

¶2The Chief Engineer, Thermal/Gas Turbine Projects, Chennai.

¶3The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Valudhur Thermal/Gas Turbine Power Stations, Valudhur, Valandharavai (BPO), Ramanthapuram – 623 536. ... Respondents in both W.Ps. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.17168 of 2017: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned E-tender notification issued by the 3rd respondent in Tender Specification No.SE/VGTPS/RMD/W.C.No.54/2017-18 dated

29.08.2017 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to issue fresh e-tender notification with BQR (Bid Qualification Requirements) for the same allotted work as mentioned in the Notification. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.17274 of 2017: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned E-tender notification issued by the 3rd respondent in Tender Specification No.SE/VGTPS/RMD/W.C.No.54/2017-18 dated

29.08.2017 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to issue fresh e-tender notification with BQR (Bid Qualification Requirements) for the same allotted work as mentioned in the Notification. For Petitioner in both W.Ps. : Mr.A.Anbalagan For Respondents : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, in both W.Ps. Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed challenging the tender notification of the year 2017.

¶2Today, when the matters are taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the prayer sought for in these writ petitions have become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶3In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, these writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

28.11.2023 ogy NCC : Yes / No. Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes / No.

B.PUGALENDHI, J. ogy To

¶1The Chairman, TANGEDCO, Chennai.

¶2The Chief Engineer, Thermal/Gas Turbine Projects, Chennai.

¶3The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Valudhur Thermal/Gas Turbine Power Stations, Valudhur, Valandharavai (BPO), Ramanthapuram – 623 536.

28.11.2023