SURESH CHANDRA AND ANR. Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) BY means of this petition, the Petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 03.11.2010 and 04.11.2010, passed by Respondent No. 3. A further writ in the nature of mandamus has been sought commanding the Zila Panchayat, Haridwar to complete the process initiated vide publication dated 03.11.2010 within the shortest possible time. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the impugned orders have been passed by Respondent No. 3 without competence. Learned Senior Advocate has vehemently argued that before passing of the impugned orders, the tender notice was invited by Respondent No. 2 for carrying out civil works under Zila Panchayat Haridwar. Thereafter, the Petitioner purchased the tender. At this stage, District Magistrate, passed the impugned order by getting it published in "Amar Ujala", "Dainik Jagran", "Hindustan" and others.

(3.) I have perused the record. Rule 19 of the Rules deals with the provision of inviting tenders, which provides that no contract for executing of a work estimated to cost more than Rs. 5,000/ - shall be given until sealed tenders for the contract, accompanied by earnest money to the amount fixed by proper authority, have been invited by public notice, which should be published by insertion in one or more local newspapers as the Mukhya Adhikari or Khand Vikas Adhikari, as the case may be, thinks fit and by pasting copies thereof at conspicuous places at the office of the Parishad or Kshettra Samiti, the Collector's Office, the court of the District Judge or the court of every Additional District Judge, and Munsif, if the office of District Judge is not situate, the headquarter of every tehsil, local offices of the Public Works Department (Building and Road), Irrigation Department and Local Self Government Engineering Department.