RAJ CONSTRUCTION Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS in both these writ petitions the questions involved are common, as agreed, the parties have been heard for disposal of the same by this common order.

(2.) IN both these writ petitions, the petitioners are aggrieved by the decision dated 17.2.2004 of the Departmental Tender Committee to allot the remaining work of Pilet Channel from 0.00 K.M. to 6 K.M from Digha to Rajapur bridge under Ganga Sone Flood Protection Division, Digha, Patna to Shristi Developers Pvt. Ltd. (respondent no. 7) pursuant to the tender notice contained in Annexure 1 to first writ petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be evident from the comparative statement (Annexure 2) giving details of all the parties that the bid of respondent no. 7 was not the lowest, yet decision for settlement has been taken in their favour without adopting any valid criteria. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner in the second case, the respondent authorities have acted whimsically and arbitrarily in deciding the figure of lowest tender without correctly applying the formula for determining the Lowest Acceptable Limit as given in Clause 1.2.4 of the tender notice and malafide arriving altogether the different figure for giving favour to respondent no. 7. In support of this he submitted that the decision of the Committee that the rate quoted for more than two digit after decimal by the tenderer be ingnored and to accept only up to two digit after decimal of the rate of tenderers is wholly arbitrary and would make lot of difference to even the State Ex -chequor.