MANHAR SHARMA Vs. NAGAR NIGAM, DEHRADUN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Undisputed facts of the present case, inter alia, are that petitioner is engaged in the business of advertisement and is proprietor of M/s. Media Professionals Enterprises and M/s. Drishti Media Coverage; in the year 2013, police authorities of Dehradun city were pleased to permit the petitioner to construct/establish police booths and umbrellas at different places and to advertise thereon; petitioner in the name of M/s. Media Professionals Enterprises started raising police booths and umbrellas at different places and also started advertising thereon; in the year 2013, itself, Nagar Nigam, Dehradun has raised objection in the matter of advertisement on various police booths and umbrellas saying business of advertisement can be controlled by Nagar Nigam only under Ss. 305, 306 of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act read with different Bye -laws and Regulations in this regard; on the objection being raised by the Nagar Nigam, police authorities have directed the petitioner and its proprietorship firms to pay advertisement fees to the Nagar Nigam directly; petitioner, thereafter, started paying advertisement fees, as levied by Nagar Nigam, to the Nagar Nigam for the advertisements being carried out on different police booths and umbrellas; meanwhile, Nagar Nigam was pleased to issue tender notice dated 13.03.2013 inviting tenders to grant contract of advertisement; feeling aggrieved, petitioner and its proprietorship firms have filed WPMS No. 623 of 2013; during the pendency of the writ petition, tender notice dated 13.03.2013 was withdrawn and fresh tenders were invited vide second tender notice dated 08.09.2014; feeling aggrieved by the second tender notice, petitioner was compelled to file second petition being Writ Petition No. 2544 (MS) of 2014; during the pendency of Writ Petition being WPMS No. 2544 of 2014, second tender notice was also withdrawn and entire tender process was cancelled, therefore, second writ petition No. 2544 of 2014 was dismissed being infructuous vide order dated 19.11.2014; third tender notice issued by Nagar Nigam was published in daily newspaper Dainik Jagran on 16.11.2014 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition); as per tender notice dated 16.11.2014, bidders were supposed to collect tender form and terms and conditions of the tender from the office of Nagar Nigam or to download from the website of Nagar Nigam; last date of submission of bids was between 18.11.2014 to 26.11.2014; bids were to be open at 03.00 p.m. on 26.11.2014; as per terms and conditions of the tender notice, every bidder should have minimum turnover of Rupees One Crore while net worth should be minimum of Rupees Three Crore; as per another term and condition of the tender notice, at page No. 35 of the paper book, minimum concession fee of the said project was Rs. 25,00,000/ - per annum. Undisputedly, on 19.11.2014 i.e., after first date of submission of bid document, Nagar Nigam has changed terms and conditions of the tender notice; as revealed from pages 61 and 62 of the paper book, net worth was reduced from Rupees Three Crore to Rupees Sixty Six Lakh and minimum reserved concession was also reduced from Rs. 25,00,000/ - to Rs. 15,00,000/ -.

(2.) Undisputedly, as per initial, terms and conditions of the tender notice, as available at page 41 of the paper book, bidder/consortium shall submit audited balance sheet/annual report of the lead member in support of the financial date while as per corrected/amended terms and conditions of the tender notice, at page 69 of the paper book, in case of bidder being a consortium, the financial capability (turnover and net worth) criteria must be fulfilled by consortium.

(3.) The main grievance of Mr. V.K. Kohli, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner is that since, last date of submission of bids, was between 18.11.2014 to 26.11.2014, therefore, after commencement of the game, it was not open to the Nagar Nigam to change the terms and conditions of the tender notice reducing the net worth from Rupees Three Crores to Rupees Sixty Six Lakh, minimum reserved concession fee from Rs. 25,00,000/ - should have not been reduced to Rs. 15,00,000/ -. Nor other conditions should have been changed.