GREEN EXPRESS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are tied up together for disposal by a common judgment and order as an identical question of law is involved in both the writ petitions.

(2.) FOR purpose of appreciation of the factual matrix a very brief enumeration may be availed of.

(3.) IN view of this, according to the railway respondents, the tender was discharged. Ultimately the railway respondents contended that the petitioner failed to make any case which warrants adjudication of this Court. The railway respondents produced the records relating to the tender in question and it appears from the note of CCM dated 18.05.2011 as under: Para 99 of the proposed agreement appears to be in variance with the para 20 of the Amendment to Freight Marketing Circular No.12 of 2006, issued on 09.02.2010. The Board circular insists that in case of violation of this provision, the lease contract will be cancelled. But the agreement provides, "in addition to this, his registration may also be cancelled depending upon the seriousness of the offence and if excess weight is detected to have been loaded in the leased Brake Van, the leaseholder shall be penalized". This need be checked whether the agreement has been properly vetted by Finance and legal branch of the division and/or the headquarters. It also further appears from the records that the tabulation sheet was prepared and in the said the petitioner's firm was found highest bidder in the said tender process.