G GENGAVARAJAN Vs. CHENNAI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the above writ petition to call for the tender notification dated 23. 10. 2002 which was published in a newspaper on 26. 10. 2002 by the first respondent, to quash the same and consequently allot the contract to the petitioner.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the first respondent has invited tenders on earlier occasion on 10. 09. 2002 towards collection of parking fee in Chennai Mofussil Bus Terminal in Koyambedu, Chennai, through an advertisement in a Tamil daily by tender notification dated 6. 9. 2002. The upset price for the above tender was fixed at Rs. 25 lakhs, wherein the petitioner has participated and made an offer of Rs. 32,05,000/ -. On 27. 9. 2002, when the tenders were opened, the petitioner was declared as the highest bidder. Thereafter, since the petitioner did not receive any communication from the first respondent, he has submitted a representation dated 16. 10. 2002 to the first respondent to allot the contract in his favour as early as possible. However, to his shock and surprise, the tender was cancelled on 25. 10. 2002 by the first respondent without assigning any reasons. Subsequently, the first respondent has invited fresh tender notification dated 23. 10. 2002, once again through their advertisement in a newspaper called 'dinabumi' on 26. 10. 2002, which was opened on 13. 11. 2002. In the subsequent tender, the second respondent was selected as the successful bidder, even though he has quoted a lesser amount in the previous tender which was opened on 27. 9. 2002.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the first respondent ought not to have called for retender without even cancelling the earlier tender and the representation submitted by it was not considered and there is no transparency in awarding the contract