LEGAL CORRESPONDENT Hyderabad Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the Telangana High Court has set aside a gov- ernment tender issued for procurement of dress mate- rials and bedsheet supplies to educational institutions, which bypassed the hand- loom societies in the State. The Court, while allowing a writ petition filed by the Veeranjaneya Handioom Weavers Mutually Aided Co-operative Production and Sales Society Ltd., Warangal, ruled that offi- cials cannot bypass the pro- curement mechanism pre- scribed under G.O.Ms.No.1 dated March 11, 2024. The Government Order mandates that all depart- ments procure handloom products exclusively through the Telangana State Handloom Weavers Co-op- erative Society Limited (TSCO), unless a "non- availability certificate" is is- sued. The GO clearly speci- fies that all Departments. Corporations, Institutions Government Hospitals etc., to procure their handloom requirements exclusively through TSCO and other eí- igible societies. In case of non-availability or inability to supply, TSCO has to issue a non-availability certifi- cate. It is only upon such a certificate being issued that departments may procure from other agencies. The petitioners chal- lenged tender notifications dated April 2, 2026, issued by the Project Monitoring Unit (PMÚ) for procure- ment of items such as uni- forms, bedding materials, and other supplies for stu- dents of residential and gov- ernment educational insti- tutions. They contended that the tender process was initiated after cancellation of earlier procurement or- ders placed with TSCO, without following the pro- cedure laid down in the GO, The Court observed that the weaver community re- mains economically vulner- able and dependent on co- operative sOcieties for livelihood. It noted that the State's policy framework, including G.O.Ms.No.l, was introduced to ensure con- tinuous employment and socio-economic protection for weavers. Rejecting the State's con- tention that the PMU was authorized to undertake open market procurement under a separate Govern- ment Order, the Court held that such administrative arrangements cannot over- ride 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 in- ability to supply the re- quired goods.