JUDGMENT 1. - The Petitioner has filed this writ petition as a public interest litigation and has also submitted stay application praying that the State of Rajasthan may be restrained in placing any order in favour of respondents No. 2 to 4 or to any other out side unit in respect of their current requirement. 2. Ex-parte interim stay order was granted by this court on 28-2-1992, by which directions were given that no further action be taken in pursuance of the rate contract order dated 7-2-1992 issued in favour of respondents No. 2 to 4. 3. Arguments of learned counsel for the parties have been heard on the stay application. 4. The submission of Mr. Kuhad, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the State Government through its various officials is exercising power for placing orders against the interest of the State and in collusion with other parties of out side Rajasthan, and have put the State to a loss of big magnitude. The action of the officers/officials has been alleged to be mala fide. It has further been submitted that in accordance with the scheme of the Government of Rajasthan for purchase' of stores and other materials, preference has to be given to the Small Scale Industries in accordance with the Circular dated 15th October, 1966 and that in view of the Circular dated 23rd March, 1987, the preference has to be given to the local units in purchase of stores by the Stare Public sector under-takings and other autonomous bodies. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the action of the Government should have been fair, reasonable and just. There is a contravention of the provisions of Rule 3(a) since out side firms have been given preference. It has also been submitted that if units existing in the State are not protected then they will be ruined and even the capacity of the local units have been incorrectly ascertained while excluding them or placing orders for lower quantity and the out side units were informed in advance with regard to the requirement, as a result of which the out side units could manufacture the goods according to the specification of the Government of Rajasthan and this could be possible only when the officers were in collusion with those parties and such information was not given to the local manufacturers. The manufacturers would be able to know the specification in advance only when there was a collusion and imaginary reasons have been given for higher price to out side manufactures. Malice and corrupt practice have been alleged against the respondents. It has also been submitted that finalisation of the tenders have been done at a later stage so that the out side parties may be b2ncfi'ed and in accordance with the Industrial Policy and the Rules for preference to the local purchases, the State Government has acted contrary to the declared industrial policy and the Rules and the action is against the doctrine of promissory estoppel and the commodity being fragile and voluminous, therefore, the local manufacturers will not be able to sale their products out side the State of Rajasthan. 5. On behalf of the respondents, an objection with regard to maintainability of writ petition and with regard to the stay application have been raised and an application has been filed to vacate the stay order. 6. At this stage, it would not be proper to adjudicate upon various issues raised by the petitioner. The petitioner has moved an application for impleading few more respondents to whom orders have been placed. It would be proper that those respondents may also be heard before the writ could be finally disposed of and the application of the petitioner to that extent is allowed. 7. Regarding the stay, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the public interest would be served in placing the Government in a situation by which they could get the orders executed before 31st March, 1992. The order dated 28.2.1992 passed by this court is, therefore, vacated and the State of Rajasthan would be free to get the orders executed within the stipulated time i.e. 31st March, 1992 and if the various manufacturers with whom the orders have been placed are not in a position to fulfil the order then it will be the duty of the State Government to take appropriate action against them. The work of lying pipes, which are to be used for water for drinking purposes is the ut-most urgency of the day and, therefore, no delay can be allowed by this court in the execution of such a social and public object. The work of lying pipes, which are to be used for water for drinking purposes is the ut-most urgency of the day and, therefore, no delay can be allowed by this court in the execution of such a social and public object. Providing the facility of drinking water is of utmost urgency and even if it is found at the stage of final disposal of the writ petition that the action of the Government was not in accordance with law, the court has ample power to compensate the persons who have suffered, in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution. 8. In the result, the stay application is dismissed and the stay order dated 28.2.92 is vacated.Stay Application Dismissed. *******