Don’t work behind smokescreen: HC slams Karnataka govt

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has castigated the state government for the manner in which contracts for the transportation of food grains by the Food, Civil Supplies, and Consumer Affairs Department were cancelled and reallocated.

“In these cases, the tenderers will not learn what is going on behind the smoke screen. Therefore, the smoke from the screen will have to be warded off by bringing transparency into these proceedings, failing which, such actions will become arbitrary, as one person at his whim or caprice can either allot the tender to anyone or cancel the tender and decide to issue a re-tender,” the HC said, setting aside the cancellation of the contract of Shaik Abdul Khaliq. Khaliq won the tender for the transport of food grains from FCI godowns to Magadi and Kanakapura taluks from March 2022 to February 2023.

However, a re-tender notification was issued for 39 taluks including these two. Khaliq challenged this in the HC, which was heard by Justice M Nagaprasanna. The government defended the re-tender, citing that a committee of five members had met to take this decision as per the procedure.

However, the HC noted that “If the proceeding and the affidavits filed by the authorities are noticed, they are at variance with each other. The first affidavit dated November 17, 2022 filed by the deputy director indicates that the attendance sheet was signed by members and later the commissioner signed the proceedings. Nowhere the affidavits indicate that the attendance sheet was signed in the morning and the proceedings were taken up during the course of the day and only sample proceedings were sent to these people signed by the commissioner.” The HC said that the alleged meeting itself was a mystery. “It becomes a mystery as to “where is the final proceeding”.

If according to the affidavits filed before this court by all other members of the committee, it was only a sample proceeding, there is no final proceeding at all, and decisions are taken on the basis of the sample proceeding alone. The law does not recognise tender determination decisions made on sample proceedings.”

Quashing the actions of the committee on re-tender, the HC said, “Tender should not become a tool of arbitrary action at the hands of the state. A tenderer may not have a right to question or bring up every proceeding before this court, but the action of the state should be transparent and inspire confidence in the decisionmaking process when records are summoned by this court. Records seen, and the affidavits filed, are a cobweb.”

Castigating the state, the HC said, “The fact is that the government has acted in a manner that does not behove its status, and that is what merits consideration.”