Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Mr. Lohith M and Jogalls Chayagrahakara Sangha, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the tender notification dated 28.10.2017 issued by the Jog Falls Management Authority (respondent No.2) for granting a concession at Jog Falls. The petitioners contended that the State Government (respondent No.1) lacked authority to issue the tender notification, as the Jog Falls Management Authority was the competent authority under the Karnataka Tourism Policy. They also argued that the tender process violated the principles of natural justice and transparency, as the notification did not require the concessionaire to provide basic amenities like drinking water, toilets, and parking. The respondents, including the State and the private respondents (Binumon and Sudheer Marakala), opposed the petition, arguing that the tender was issued in accordance with the policy and that the petitioners had no locus standi. The court admitted the petition and heard it finally. The court held that the petitioners, being local residents and a consumer association, had locus standi to challenge the tender. The court found that the State Government lacked authority to issue the tender notification, as the Jog Falls Management Authority was the designated authority under the Karnataka Tourism Policy. The court also held that the tender notification violated the policy by not requiring the concessionaire to provide basic amenities and by lacking transparency. Consequently, the court quashed the tender notification dated 28.10.2017 and all further proceedings thereto.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Locus Standi - Public Interest Litigation - Petitioners, a local resident and a consumer association, have locus standi to challenge a tender notification affecting public amenities at Jog Falls, as they are directly affected by the grant of concession. (Paras 1-3) B) Administrative Law - Tender Process - Authority to Issue Tender - The State Government lacked authority to issue the tender notification dated 28.10.2017 for granting concession at Jog Falls, as the Jog Falls Management Authority was the competent authority under the Karnataka Tourism Policy. (Paras 4-6) C) Administrative Law - Tender Conditions - Compliance - The tender notification violated the Karnataka Tourism Policy by not requiring the concessionaire to provide basic amenities like drinking water, toilets, and parking, and by not ensuring transparency in the selection process. (Paras 7-9) D) Natural Justice - Principles of Fairness - The tender process was vitiated by non-compliance with principles of natural justice, as the petitioners were not given an opportunity to be heard before the tender was issued. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government had the authority to issue the tender notification dated 28.10.2017 for granting concession at Jog Falls, and whether the tender process was vitiated by non-compliance with the Karnataka Tourism Policy and principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The tender notification dated 28.10.2017 issued by respondent No.2 is quashed. All further proceedings thereto are also quashed.
Law Points
- Locus standi of local residents and associations to challenge tender process
- Authority of State Government to issue tender notification for Jog Falls
- Compliance with tender conditions and principles of natural justice
- Requirement of transparency in public tenders
