Green Owill Waste Management, vs The District Collector,

Court
Madras High Court

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.09.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026 and CMP(MD) No.12311 of 2026
and WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 and CMP(MD) No.11770 of 2026
WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026
Green Owill Waste Management, Represented by its Proprietor,
G. Chandran (Aged About 60 Years),
S/o. R.G. Gomathinayagam,
No. 42, Periyasamy Kovil Street,
Srivilliputhur, ...Appellant
- Vs. -
1. The District Collector,
O/o. the District Collectorate, Virudhunagar.
2. The Commissioner/tender Inviting Authority,
O/o. the Commissioner,
Srivilliputhur Municipality,
Virudhunagar District.
3. M. Kavitha, W/o. Murugesan,
South Radha Street,Srivilliputhur,
Virudhunagar District.
... Respondents
WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026
R.Kavitha ... Appellant
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
- Vs. -
1. The Green Owill Waste Management, Represented by its Proprietor,
G. Chandran (Aged About 60 Years),
S/o. R.G. Gomathinayagam,
No. 42, Periyasamy Kovil Street, Srivilliputhur,
2.The District Collector, O/o. the District Collectorate, Virudhunagar.
3. The Commissioner/tender Inviting Authority,
O/o. the Commissioner,
Srivilliputhur Municipality,
Virudhunagar District.
... Respondents
Prayer:Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the
order dated 06.08.2026 made in W.P.(MD). No. 21711 of 2026.
WA(MD) No.1417/2026
For Appellant : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj
for M/s.Veera Associates
For Respondents : Mr.M.Kannan for R1
Special Government Pleader
Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi for R3
WA(MD) No.1353/2026
For Appellant : Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi
For Respondents : Mr.M.Kannan for R2&R3
Special Government Pleader
Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj for R1
for M/s.Veera Associates
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J)
Both the writ appeals have been filed questioning the order of the
learned Single Judge dated 06.08.2026 in WP(MD) No.21711 of 2026.
2. The said writ petition had been filed by the appellant in WA(MD)
No.1417 of 2026. The appellant in WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 had been
impleaded as the third respondent. They had both participated in a tender
nd
called for by the 2 respondent/Commissioner, Srivilliputhur Municipality
for engaging 50 labourers called as Dengue workers for Srivilliputhur
Municipality. Initially, a tender notification was issued on 04.06.2026. It
was a simple tender notification inviting bids. Thereafter another
notification was issued setting out minimum wages, which should be paid to
each worker and that was determined at Rs.578.87/- per day.
2.1. When the bids were opened, it was found that the appellant in
WA(MD) No.1417/2026 had quoted an exact amount, which was set as the
Page 3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
minimum wages amount in the tender notification. The appellant in
WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 however had quoted a sum of Rs.510/- per day,
which was much less than the minimum wages determined in the tender
notification. However, the appellant in WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 was
declared as L1. The learned Single Judge had stated that such declaration as
L1 was not proper and therefore had directed a fresh tender to be issued by
the authorities.
3. Challenging that direction, WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026 has been
filed on the ground that the appellant therein should have been declared as
L1. Challenging the rejection of the declaration as L1 by the learned Single
Judge, WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 had been filed.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants in both the
appeals and the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents.
5. This is an issue, which should be resolved and should not be kept
pending any further, since it is a tender for supply of 50 labourers for
Dengue work in Srivilliputhur Municipality. It would only be appropriate
Page 4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
that the labourers, who are engaged are paid atleast minimum wages. They
cannot be paid less than the minimum determined as 578.87/- per day.
6. The appellant in WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026 had quoted the very
same price. However, the appellant in WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026 had
however quoted Rs.510/- per day. Naturally, the person, who quotes the
minimum wage should be declared as the successful bidder, which would
indicate that the appellant in WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026 should have been
declared. That would have left that particular appellant as the only sole
bidder available. Negotiations should then have been called or a fresh
tender should have been issued. It would have then become a case of a
single tenderer. It is also seen that the tender notice had been split into two
with one being issued on 04.06.2026 without the minimum wage being
specified and the second being the subsequent corrigendum being issued.
7. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the appellant in
WA(MD) No.1417 of 2026 that the appellant in WA(MD) No.1353 of 2026
is a first time participant and did not have requisite documents for payment
of ESI. It had been stated that though the said document had not been
Page 5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
furnished, the respondent had called upon the said appellant to furnish the
document. It is therefore contended that some favouritism was shown to the
appellant in WA(MD) No.1353 of 026.
8. We would go by the directions of the learned Single Judge in
directing a fresh tender to be called. Let a notification be issued giving the
minimum wage that should be quoted by the participants. If both the
appellants quote the very same minimum wage, then they should be called
for negotiations. If again after negotiation if both give the same amount, the
one who is more experienced should be selected as the successful bidder.
9. The writ appeals stand disposed of with the above observation and
direction. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are
closed.
(C.V.K.,J.) (R.S.V,J.)
03.09.2026
NCC : Yes
Index : Yes
RR
To
The District Collector Virudhunagar District
Page 6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )

2026:MHC:3677
WA(MD)No.1417 of 2026
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J
AND
R.SAKTHIVEL, J
RR
WA(MD) Nos.1417 and 1353 of 2026
03.09.2026
Page 7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 11:25:16 am )