(1.) THE facts involved in the two writ petitions are identical and therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) THE Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division II, Badaun (Respondent No. 1) issued notice on 13 -8 -1999 inviting tenders in respect of certain works. The petitioners M/s. Shanti Enterprises and some others submitted tenders for various items of work. The tender submitted by M/s. Durga Enterprises, Badaun (Respondent No. 5) was accepted. The writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 2 -9 -1999 by which tender of Respondent No. 5 was accepted. A further prayer has been made that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to accept the petitioner's tender.
(3.) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioner that so far as Tender No. T -9 is concerned, the rates quoted by the petitioner with regard to 11 K.Y line, L.T. line and T/FDP were lower than that of Respondent No. 5, yet his tender was not accepted. With regard to T -6 it is urged that the rates offered by the petitioner were very much lower than that offered by Respondent No. 5. Similarly with regard to T -7 it is urged that the rates offered by petitioner were almost one third of the rates offered by Respondent No. 5. It is thus urged that the rates for various items of work offered by the petitioner being much lower than that of Respondent No. 5, the Executive Engineer concerned com mitted gross illegality and showed undue favour in awarding contract to Respon dent No. 5.