(1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) PETITIONER 's contention is that though its offer was lower but even then the work has been awarded to respondent No. 3.
(3.) MRS . A.R. Choudhary, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that petitioner indicated the service tax separately as per the terms of NIT whereas respondent No. 3 did not indicate it separately. Had the price bid been compared excluding service tax, petitioner's bid of Rs. 139.51 crores was lower than the bid of respondent No. 3 of Rs. 140.64 crores.