B HIMMATLAL AGRAWAL Vs. WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the rival parties.

(2.) By the present petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the communications dated 05.05.2010 Annexure-E, 14/17.05.2010 Annexure-H by which the representations made by the petitioner in the matter of compliance of the condition as to furnishing bank solvency certificate in terms of Clause-3.2 (e) of Instructions To Bidders in the tender document stood rejected.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for the parties the only point that arises for our determination is whether in terms of Clause-3.2 (e) of the tender document, the petitioner having submitted bank solvency which had expired by four days and wanted to rectify the defect should have been allowed to do so and whether the said term of furnishing the bank solvency was merely ancillary or subsidiary