Hyderabad HC tells engineer firm to prove its calibre

Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court on Wednesday directed M\s Envian Engineers Pvt. Ltd. to furnish details of its turnover over the past five years and also prove its competency before the court to participate in competitive bidding to develop start up area in Amaravati under the Swiss Challenge mode.

Justice Challa Kodandaram was dealing with a petition by the firm challenging GO No. 1, issued by the AP government in January 2017, amending its GO No. 170 issued approving the proposal submitted by the Singapore Consortium. This proposal was the original project proponent for development of the start up area.

D. Prakash Reddy, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner company, said that the AP government made the amendment to the notification with the intention of benefiting the Singapore Consortium.

When the judge questioned the seriousness of the petitioner in participating in bidding and also its eligibility, counsel submitted that they have challenged the eligibility criteria prescribed by the government.

He said that the government has incorporated a clause that will enable the consortium revise its original proposal when any of competitive bidders stood as highest bidder, but the highest bidder has no such chance.

Mr Reddy said there are several such clauses that benefit the Singapore Consortium and hence the reason the petitioner moved court seeking invitation of tenders to through open bidding system.

Present awards  to journalists: HC
The Hyderabad High Court on Wednesday directed the governments of both AP and TS to present awards conferred on journalists in 2012 within eight weeks along with the cash award.

Justice Challa Kodandaram granted the interim order while hearing a plea by K. Ramesh Babu, a journalist, challenging the inordinate delay in presenting the awards despite a GO being issued to this effect by the government of erstwhile AP in 2012.

N.S. Arjun Kumar, counsel for the petitioner, told the court that though several representations were made by journalists selected for awards to the Chief Ministers of both the states, no action was taken till date on the pleas. He submitted that 33 journalists were selected but only three given awards so far.

Maintaining that award-winning journalists must not be made to beg for what is rightfully theirs, the judge sought response from both states. When counsels for both states sought for time to get instructions, the judge granted the interim order directing both the states to present the awards along with cash award.