CHANDRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 27.5.2009, passed by Chief Medical Officer, Basti, issuing work order in favour of respondent No. 6 and a further direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 2, the District Magistrate to hold inquiry and to decide the representation dated 9.6.2009 sent by the petitioner to the Director General Medical and Health Services, U.P., the copy of which is sent to respondent No. 2 too.

(2.) We have heard learned Counsel Sri Pradeep Kumar asssisted by Sri Uma Nath Pandey on behalf of the petitioner, learned Counsel Sri B. N. Singh assisted by Sri P. C. Singh on behalf of respondent No. 6 and Sri C. K. Rai learned standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner a registered contractor is doing the contract work in 500 O.P.E.C. hospitals in Kaili district Basti for repairs, minor construction, electricity repairs, painting and instrument repairs for last 5 years and the officers of the said hospital are fully satisfied with the work of the petitioner. As per tender notice dated 28.11.2008, for three works namely, (i) hospital repairs, painting and minor constructions; (ii) hospitals, electricity repairs and (iii) hospital repairs of furniture and instruments, the petitioner and six other tenderer have submitted their tender forms in two different envelopes, one is for the technical bids and other one for the financial bids, out of which eight tenders were found to be up to the mark but the tender envelope of M/s. Chandra Construction Co., the petitioner was not opened and only three tenderer's bids were considered. M/s. Diwakar Constructions and Suppliers bid was less than 10.7% as per the scheduled rate fixed by the Public Works Department, M/s. Satyendra Pratap Singh of Barabanki offered 35.75% less than the scheduled rate whereas Nagfani Enterprises, Barabanki offered the bid of 15.6% less than to the scheduled rate. Thus, the rates of M/s. Satyendra Pratap Singh were found lowest, but the Committee creating doubt about the potency of construction did not find the offer of the said company up to the mark and the matter was postponed to be considered on 31.1.2009. The petitioner submitted objections on 19.1.2009, when he ? came to know that his envelope has not been included in the bid and the matter remained delayed due to declaration of General Elections. Respondent Diwan Chand and other contractors filed W.P. No. 16070/2009, M/s. Diwakar Constructions and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. for mandamus seeking directions to the C.M.O. for deciding the representations. On the direction of this Court the representations of those petitioners were decided by the C.M.O. as per impugned order dated 27.5.2009 whereby he granted temporary contract to respondent No. 6 Diwan Chand without calling the meeting of Committee for the period till calling new tenders for financial year 2009-10. The C.M.O. neither rejected the tenders submitted by other tenderer nor accepted any of the tender of the bidders and gave the contract to respondent No. 6 taking interest in him and. even without adopting the procedure for accepting and rejecting the tenders. The petitioner came to know that the entire tender proceeding has been cancelled while the petitioner's offer was less to the amount offered by respondent No. 6 receiving the tender illegally from the C.M.O. The allotment of the work by the C.M.O. to respondent No. 6 without finalization of the proceedings of tender is wholly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the terms and conditions of the contract, therefore the petitioner sent a representation in this regard to the Director General Medical and Health.