SACHDEVA INDUSTRIES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since a short point is involved, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the Counsel for the parties.

(2.) According to the respondents since the petitioner and respondent No. 6 did not fall in the category of approved established suppliers, such suppliers were at best entitled to 20% of the work and in fact 20% of the total work was awarded to the petitioner and respondent No. 6, i.e., 100 kms. each. It is further the case of the respondents that since the petitioner had not bid for the entire work, there was no question for its being considered for the entire quantity of work and respondents I to 3 had to in any event fall back on the tenderers who had bid for the entire work. As a matter of fact respondent No. 9 was awarded a contract for quantity of 650 kms. whereas respondent No. 5 was awarded contract for 200 kms. at the rates quoted by respondent No. 9.

(3.) It is not disputed that amongst the tenderers who quoted for the entire work, the rates of respondent No. 9 were the lowest and that is why respondent No. 5 was also awarded the work at the rates offered by respondent No. 9. The petitioner was considered only for development order to the extent of 20% of the work along with respondent No. 6 because the petitioner was not on the approved list of regular suppliers maintained by the Research, Designs and Standards Organisation (for short RDSO). The petitioner claims that the rate? offered by it were the lowest and, therefore, it is not satisfied with the 10% work awarded to it. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the grounds for which the petitioner was not considered as an approved/established supplier were extraneous and, therefore, the action of the respondents was wrong and laible to be set aside.