LAWS(ORI)-2013-6-14

DIVINE CONSTRUCTION, JAJPUR Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

Decided On June 26, 2013
Divine Construction, Jajpur Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ODISHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The present writ petition has been filed by a partnership firm in the name of M/s. Divine Construction seeking direction to opposite party No. 3 to consider the tender bid of the petitioner-firm in terms of the Works Department Resolution dated 11.10.1977 under Annexure-7 by granting concession to the petitioner-firm on the basis of the firm being constituted along with one Balaram Jena, a member of the Scheduled Caste holding 60% share in the said firm.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the said Balaram Jena (S.C.) was the holder of 'B' Class Contractor Registration Certificate which had been issued to him by the Office of the Engineer-in-Chief (Civil), Odisha. It is further averred in the writ petition that the said Balaram Jena had entered into a partnership agreement along with two others, namely, Prasanta Das and Susanta Kumar Samal, who formed the partnership firm by the name of M/s. Divine Construction (petitioner-firm). It is also made clear that the said Balaram Jena was holding 60% of share while the rest of the two partners hold 20% share each. This partnership agreement was entered into between the parties on 01.08.2012. It appears that after the partnership deed was signed by the respective parties, they made the necessary application to the authorities concerned for being issued with P.W.D. Contractors Registration Certificate and M/s. Divine Construction was granted in Special Class Registration Certificate bearing Registration No. 9264 of 2012-13 vide order No. 34201 dated 05.10.2012. Pursuant to such registration, it appears that the petitioner-firm had participated in a tender floated by the State of Odisha under Annexure-5, but the petitioner after having participated in such tender apprehending that the benefit available to the petitioner-firm as declared by the State of Odisha under Annexure-7 may not be extended to the petitioner-firm have approached this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State after being noticed issued to them has obtained a written instruction from the office of the Superintending Engineer Cuttack (R &B) Circle dated 20.06.2013, a copy of which is filed by way of memo in Court today. In terms of the such written instruction para-11 thereof is extracted herein below: