JAVID AHMAD LONE Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the set of facts and the ground urged coupled with submissions made at Bar, the instant application is allowed and requirement of affixing the court fee in the shape of stamps etc. with the petition dispensed with for the time being. However, the deficiency shall be made good as and when Court starts functioning in normal manner. CM disposed of accordingly.

(2.) In the instant petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs:

(3.) In Poddar Steel Corpn. v. Ganesh Engineering Works (supra), the Supreme Court has observed that the requirements in a tender notice can be classified into two categories - those which lay down the essential conditions of eligibility and the others which are merely ancillary or subsidiary with the main object to be achieved by the conditions. It has been held that in the first case the authority issuing the tender may be required to enforce them rigidly; in the other cases it must be open to the authority to deviate from and not to insist upon the strict literal compliance of the condition in appropriate cases. In that case, the relevant clause of the tender notice required the tender to be accompanied by deposit of earnest money of Rs.50,000.00 by cash or by demand draft drawn on the State Bank of India. The tenderer to whom the tender was allotted had accompanied its tender with a Banker's cheque marked and certified by the Union Bank of India as good for payment. The Tender Committee also had verified the cheque from the Bank and allowed the tenderer to participate in the tender process. The unsuccessful tender challenged the decision by a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court contending that there was no defect in its tender and that the tender of the successful tenderer could not have been validly accepted as the necessary condition of payment of Rs.50,000.00 as earnest money with the tender had not been complied with. The High Court allowed the writ petition. The successful tenderer took the matter to the Supreme Court. It was in context of the aforesaid fact scenario that the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court holding as under: