BHARATKUMAR NARAYANDAS JOSHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the proceedings initiated with respect to the impugned tender notice dated 19/02/2017, being No. NA.MA.NI/HMT/547/2017 and revised tender notice dated 23/02/2017, being No.DC/HMT/TR/Commerce/526 issued by the Divisional Officer, Himatnagar for allotment of new stalls at S.T. Bus Station, Meghraj, District Aravalli. By way of amendment it is prayed to quash and set aside the orders dated 18/03/2017 passed by respondent no.2 by which the new stalls at ST. Bus Stand, Meghraj, District Aravalli have been alloted in favour of respondent no.4.

(2.) The facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in nutshell are as under;

(3.) Shri Dave, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has vehemently submitted that as such the petitioners were already granted the license for the stalls on lease at S.T. Bus Stand, Meghraj, and therefore, there was no reason for the respondents to invite fresh bids. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that even otherwise as per the policy of the Corporation, which was supplied to the petitioners under the RTI and as per Circular No.9/2010, all the bidders were required to be called for negotiation. It is submitted that as in the present case the petitioners were called for negotiation, and therefore, the impugned action on the part of respondents nos.2 and 3 in accepting the bid of respondent no.4 and allotting the stall to him is contrary to the policy stated in Circular No.9/2010. It is submitted that if the petitioners would have been called for negotiation, in that case, the petitioners, who were already having the license, would have offered the very rent/amount which respondent no.4 had offered.