(1.) THE Petitioner is said to be a leading manufacturer of office automation tables, almirahs, book cases, racks, filing cabinets, compactors, lab. furniture, modular furniture and wide range of chairs of latest design, technology and manufacturing process. The Petitioner says that it is an ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001 certified company and has experience of more than four decades.
(2.) THE Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that a tender notice was issued by the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department (PWD) of the Government of Delhi for providing modular work staff chairs, tables and compactors for use in the Delhi High Court and the Petitioner was completely overlooked for consideration because the tender notice was with reference to these items manufactured only by Godrej or their authorized dealers. According to the petitioner, the amount involved in the tender is considerable and there is no reason why established organizations such as the Petitioner should have been overlooked in at least submitting the tender.
(3.) BY the time the writ petition came up for hearing, it appears that the supplies in question had already been made and a substantial part of the payment was also released to Godrej and Boyce. The Petitioner, therefore, did not seek any substantive relief in the matter or even question the tender process but it was submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that this Court ought to examine whether the process adopted for awarding the contract was correct. This is because repeated tenders of this nature are being issued and the Petitioner has been unfairly excluded from competing in spite of its expertise.