AKHIL BHANDARI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to challenge Clauses 13 and 18 of the tender conditions contained in the tender notice dtd. 27/9/2023, for grant of mining leases. By the impugned conditions, the respondents have required that the bidders should produce certificate of past experience of operating a mining lot / mining lease / stone crusher / screening plant located in riverbed, issued by the District Mines Officer of the concerned District. The challenge to the clauses is raised on the ground that the requirement of prior experience is not borne out from the Uttarakhand Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2023, framed on 16/6/2023, and, therefore, such a requirement could not have been imposed by the respondents in the tender in question.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has, firstly, referred to Rule 23, which lays down the disqualifications. The disqualification enumerated in Rule 23 are the following : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_37_LAWS(UTN)10_2023_1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) The argument is that lack of past experience is not a disqualification under the Rules. Reliance is also placed on Rule 24, which enlists the documents, which the bidder may be required to submit. The argument is that the said Rule does not require submission of past experience certificate. The said Rule, so far as, it is relevant reads as follows : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_37_LAWS(UTN)10_2023_2.jpg</IMG> <IMG>JUDGEMENT_37_LAWS(UTN)10_2023_3.jpg</IMG>