Telangana HC quashes tender bypassing handloom societies
The Telangana High Court has struck down a government tender that bypassed handloom societies in the State, reaffirming that procurement of dress materials and bedsheets for educational institutions must follow the mandate of G.O.Ms.No.1.
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the Telangana High Court has set aside a government tender issued for procurement of dress materials and bedsheet supplies to educational institutions, which bypassed the handloom societies in the State.
The Court, while allowing a writ petition filed by the Veeranjaneya Handloom Weavers Mutually Aided Co-operative Production and Sales Society Ltd., Warangal, ruled that State authorities cannot bypass the procurement mechanism prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.1 dated March 11, 2024.
The Government Order mandates that all departments procure handloom products exclusively through the Telangana State Handloom Weavers Co-operative Society Limited (TSCO), unless a “non-availability certificate” is issued.
The GO clearly specifies that all Departments, Corporations, Institutions, Government Hospitals etc., to procure their handloom requirements exclusively through TSCO and other eligible societies. In case of non-availability or inability to supply, TSCO has to issue a non-availability certificate. It is only upon such a certificate being issued that departments may procure from other agencies.
The petitioners challenged tender notifications dated April 2, 2026, issued by the Project Monitoring Unit (PMU) for procurement of items such as uniforms, bedding materials, and other supplies for students of residential and government educational institutions. They contended that the tender process was initiated after cancellation of earlier procurement orders placed with TSCO, without following the procedure laid down in the Government Order.
The Court observed that the weaver community, which forms the backbone of the handloom industry, remains economically vulnerable and dependent on cooperative societies for livelihood. It noted that the State’s policy framework, including G.O.Ms.No.1, was introduced to ensure continuous employment and socio-economic protection for weavers.
Rejecting the State’s contention that the PMU was authorized to undertake open market procurement under a separate Government Order, the Court held that such administrative arrangements cannot override the binding mandate of G.O.Ms.No.1. It emphasized that procurement through TSCO is compulsory, and recourse to alternative agencies is permissible only after TSCO certifies its inability to supply the required goods.
The Court found that the cancellation of earlier orders placed with TSCO, as well as the issuance of fresh tenders, was not supported by any non-availability certificate, rendering the actions arbitrary and contrary to the prescribed policy.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned tender to the extent it covered items that could be supplied through TSCO, and also quashed the cancellation letter dated March 31, 2026. It directed all State departments, including the PMU, to strictly adhere to the Government Order and route procurement through TSCO.
The Court further directed TSCO to coordinate with cooperative societies and specify the items it can supply, and to issue non-availability certificates within the stipulated time frame wherever necessary, to avoid delays in procurement.
High Court adjourns BrahMos DG appointment case to June 15
Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing to June 15 in petitions challenging the order of the Hyderabad Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal setting aside the appointment of the Director General of BrahMos Aerospace.
The Division Bench was dealing with petitions filed by the Union of India and Dr Jaiteerth Joshi, an Outstanding Scientist at the Defence Research and Development Laboratory, who questioned the Tribunal’s order dated December 29, 2025.
During the hearing, counsel on both sides made preliminary submissions and sought additional time to advance detailed arguments.
Taking note of the request, the Bench adjourned the matter for continued hearing. It may be recalled that Dr Joshi was appointed as Director General of BrahMos Aerospace on November 25, 2024.
The appointment was challenged before the Hyderabad Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal by Dr Sivasubramaniam Nambi Naidu, a senior scientist with the Defence Research and Development Organisation, who was among the shortlisted candidates for the post.
The Tribunal, while allowing the plea, held that the selection process suffered from arbitrariness and set aside the appointment. It further directed the authorities to reconsider Dr Naidu’s candidature within a specified period and to make alternative in-charge arrangements to head BrahMos in the interim.
Aggrieved by these findings, the Union Government and Dr Joshi approached the High Court, where the High Court, which had earlier granted a stay on the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal.
High Court reserves order on Pilot Rohit Reddy’s bail plea
Justice K. Sujana of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday reserved orders in a criminal petition filed by former MLA Pilot Rohit Reddy, seeking regular bail in connection with a drugs case registered at Moinabad Police Station.
The petitioner was arrested following a raid conducted by the Elite Action Group for Drug Law Enforcement (EAGLE) at his farmhouse. The case involves allegations under the NDPS Act, the Arms Act, 1959, the Telangana Excise Act, 1968, and provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that the quantity of contraband seized stated to be 0.2 grams of cocaine falls within the category of “small quantity” under the NDPS Act, and that invocation of stringent provisions was unwarranted. With regard to the allegations under the Arms Act, it was submitted that no firearm was discharged during the incident.
On the other hand, opposing the bail plea, Public Prosecutor Palle Nageshwar Rao submitted that the petitioner was a habitual offender and that the present incident was not an isolated occurrence. He contended that Rohit Reddy had, on multiple occasions, organised parties at his farmhouse where drugs were allegedly consumed and distributed.
The prosecutor further stated that statements of co-accused persons indicated that the petitioner not only consumed narcotic substances but also arranged for others.
During the course of the hearing, the court sought clarification on whether any injuries were caused in the alleged firing incident. The Additional Public Prosecutor informed the court that no injuries were reported. Taking note of the rival submissions, the court reserved its order on the bail petition.
