VIJAY GOODS TRANSPORT CO Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, by Vijay goods Transport Company through its partner Gopi Chand, praying for issuance of a direction not to take into consideration the tender submitted by respondent no. 4 and to accept the tender of the petitioner authorising him to transport stationery goods from one place to the other.

(2.) FROM the petition it appears that tenders relating to transportation of stationery articles by respondent No. 3, were invited. The petitioner as well as other persons including respondent No. 4 submitted their respective tenders for the above purpose which were to be opened by respondent No. 3 on Jan. 13, 1978 at 11 a. m. in the presence of the interested parties. All the conditions under which tenders were to be accepted need not be mentioned except those having a bearing for the decision of this petition. One of the conditions was that no tender which was not accompanied by a deposit of earnest money of Rs. 500/- was to be considered and further another condition was that a tender could be accepted or rejected without assigning any reason and that full authority to do so would vest in the State Central Printing Press. On Jan. 13, 1978, at the schedule time the tenders so submitted were opened and scrutinised. The tender submitted by M/s. National Transport Corporation (respondent No. 4), was accepted as competitively it was the lowest in rate.

(3.) THE present petition has been filed to questioning the acceptance of the tender offered by respondent No. 4. The contention is that tenders, submitted by M/s. National Transport Corporation (respondent No. 4) and M/s. Jai Bharat trans port Company, were not in order, as both of them were not accompanied by the requisite deposit of Rs. 500/- each as earnest money, whereas the tenders, submitted by the petitioner M/s. Jaipur Golden Transport Co. (P.) Ltd. , m/s. Vijay Goods Transport Co. and Jai-Shanker Goods Transport Co. , were accompanied by a deposit of Rs. 500/- each as earnest money. The rate quoted by the petitioner was the lowest of all quoted in the valid tenders. Petitioner argues that thus the rate quoted by it was the lowest among the valid tenders. The petitioner further contends that the concern is entitled to a fair treatment equally before the law or the equal treatment of protection of law under Article 14 of the Constitution. He is, therefore, entitled to the grant of a contract for transporting stationery articles. Refusal to the acceptance of the tender of the petitioner infringes the fundamental right of the petitioner conferred by Article 14 of the Constitution. The discrimination or the arbitrariness is writ large on the face of it, justifying interference by this court. Learned counsel places reliance on State of Madhya Pradesh v. Thakur Bharat Singh, AIR 1967 SC 1170, as also on other cases relating to civil services in support of his contention.