INDUSTRIAL PLANTS AND WASTE TREATMENT CORPORATION Vs. CHAIRMAN BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Advocate to accept notice for respondent No.7 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. Respondents No. 1 to 4 have entered caveat. At this stage, I see no reason to issue notice to respondents No. 5 and 6.

(2.) THE petitioner is before this Court praying that the order dated 05.12.2012 which is impugned at Annexure-X passed by the Appellate Authority be set aside. Consequently, the work order issued by the respondents No. 1 to 4 is also assailed.

(3.) THE learned counsel would further point out that the tender in fact was called from manufacturers of the machines and the petitioner was the only manufacturer. Despite the same, the respondents No. 1 to 4 have entertained the bid of the respondents No. 5 and 6 and have ultimately awarded the contract to respondent No.6. It is therefore contended that both on merits as well as on the question of maintainability, the Appellate Authority was not justified.