JAWAHAR SPEAKERS AND MANDAP CONTRACTOR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties finally, by consent.

(2.) By present Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks to invoke the constitutional powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dtd. 28/2/2024 passed by respondent No.1 refusing to open the financial bid of the petitioner and seeks directions to respondent No.1 to issue work order in favour of the petitioner and further restraining the respondents from taking further steps including publication of fresh tender pursuant to the impugned order dtd. 28/2/2024.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.1 floated tender bearing No. 10 of 2023 on 6/12/2023 for supply of electrical appliances, sound systems and other necessary items on rent basis for conducting the ensuing elections of Lok Sabha / Vidhan Sabha General Elections 2024. The tender was published on 7/12/2023 and last date for submission of tender was 22/12/2023 up-to 6.00 p.m. The petitioner participated in the said tender process and paid requisite EMD amount. The tenders submitted by the petitioner and other tenderers were opened on 26/12/2023. In all seven tenderers had participated at that time. Out of them six were declared ineligible and the petitioner was only declared as eligible. As petitioner was the single eligible tenderer, the said tender notice was cancelled by respondent No.1 and a fresh second tender notice was published on 23/1/2024. The last date for submission of said tender was 30/1/2024 and the technical envelope was to be opened on 1/2/2024. The petitioner again participated in the said tender process, uploaded the document and paid the requisite EMD amount. In all four tenderers had participated this time and respondent No.1 opened the technical envelope on 1/2/2024 and declared all the tenderers including the petitioner, as ineligible. The petitioner contends that though he had submitted the requisite experience certificate to the tune of 60% of the tender document as per Condition No.13 of the tender notice, yet the petitioner has been declared as ineligible. In the earlier round, the petitioner was held to be eligible on the basis of the same document. This shows mala fides on the part of the respondent authorities.