SUBHASHIS CHAKRABARTY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. NNB Choudhury learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K Gogoi learned CGC representing the Railways.

(2.) The present application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the petitioner assailing a letter dtd. 1/3/2023 issued by the Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) North East Frontier Railway, whereby the petitioner was intimated that the petitioner shall not be entitled for benefit under Price Variation Clause (PVC) as the contract value of tender is less than 5 crore, to be more precise Rs.4,53,21,255.25.

(3.) The basic grievance of the petitioner is that as per the tender notice for execution of the work of construction of 12 numbers of double storied type II quarters at Bongaigaon and Barpeta Road etc, the tender value was fixed at Rs.5,61,10,418.74. In terms of clause 6 of the tender condition price variation clause (PVC) is not applicable for tenders having value less than 5 crores and therefore in view of such clear provision, and the tender value being over 5 crore, the petitioner is entitled for price variation clause (PVC) inasmuch as the petitioner offered his rate on the basis of such condition.