R. K. PATRA, J. ( 1 ) THE decision of the State Government in the Education Department accepting tenders of respondents 2 to 5 for supply of school uniforms for the academic session 2004 is the subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition. ( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the case of the petitioner is that it is a small scale industry registered with the Industry Department of the state Government and it carries on business of manufacture and supply of school uniforms in the State of Sikkim. Pursuant to the notice inviting sealed tenders for supply of school uniforms for the academic session of 2004 published in the Sikkim Herald dated 13-11-2003, it submitted its sealed tenders after fulfilling all the terms and conditions of the notice inviting tenders. Besides, the petitioner, 14 other firms including respondents 2 to 5 also submitted their sealed tenders. The State Government (respondent 1) however in violation of the principle of "lowest rate and acceptable quality" laid down in the Sikkim Financial Rules, 1979 and by ignoring the lowest tenders have approved the rates offered by respondents 2 to 5. The approval of rates is illegal inasmuch as there is hike of up to 32/66% compared to the last years approved rates. By such illegal and arbitrary decision, there would be loss of about Rs. 25 lakhs to the state exchequer. ( 3 ) THE State Government in the Education Department is respondent 1 and has filed its counter-affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition. Its case is that it has been the policy decision of the state Government to distribute school uniforms freely to all school children from pre-primary to class V in the State of Sikkim. Accordingly, for the academic year 2004 sealed tenders were invited in the prescribed form from reputed cloth dealers/manufacturers for supply of school uniforms. The estimated cost of the school uniforms to be purchased was indicated to be Rs. 1,25,22,000/ -. For the purpose of processing the tenders a Committee was constituted with the following officers : 1. M. K. Panicker Director of Education, Chairman; 2. B. B. Subba Addl. Director (Text Book); 3. Gopal Basnet Addl. Director (F-C) Finance Department; 4. Trilochan Sharma Deputy Secretary (1) Planning & Dev. Department; 5. P. Tamang Sr. Accounts Officer, Education; 6. R. M. Konwar Assistant Director, Education HQ; 7. T. T. Bhutia Assistant Director (TBU ). M. K. Panicker Director of Education, Chairman; 2. B. B. Subba Addl. Director (Text Book); 3. Gopal Basnet Addl. Director (F-C) Finance Department; 4. Trilochan Sharma Deputy Secretary (1) Planning & Dev. Department; 5. P. Tamang Sr. Accounts Officer, Education; 6. R. M. Konwar Assistant Director, Education HQ; 7. T. T. Bhutia Assistant Director (TBU ). The Tender Committee open the sealed tenders on 15-12-2003 and after verifying certificates, documents etc. found that all the 15 tenders submitted by different parties including the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 were in order. It evolved the following main criteria for selection of uniforms : (i) Close examination and comparison of the samples along with rate offered by the tenderers. (ii) Reputation of the tenderers and their past experience in the supply of uniforms. (iii) Quality of stitching, making of pleats/folds, proper stitching of pockets etc. The tender committee on thorough scrutiny of all the uniform samples found that although there were many lowest tenders, the corresponding quality of uniform items offered by them were not up to the standard. The committee was of the view thai the uniforms items to be supplied to the students should be of a good quality. On the basis of the above criteria selection of the samples was made as per the chart below : Sl. Item Lowest Highest Selected No. Rs. Rs. Rs. 1. Shirt (boys) 42. 95 79. 00 65. 00 2. Shirt (girls) 42. 95 79. 00 65. 00 3. Pant 66. 95 119. 00 99. 50 4. Skirt 50. 95 97. 00 64. 25 5. Tunic 61. 60 122. 55 94. 00 6. Bakhu 310. 00 580. 00 333. 00 The rates and samples submitted by respondents 2 to 5 were found reasonable and of acceptable quality in all respects. Accordingly the recommendation of the tender committee was referred to the Planning cell and the Director of Education for further examination. The Planning Cell drew comparison of rates of uniform items of the last year to that of the recommended rate. It also noticed that with the passing of time the rates of uniform items have decreased. The financial expenditure of Rs. 220 lakhs during 1997, Rs. 253 lakhs during 1998 for purchase of school uniforms have downsized till Rs. 151 lakhs during the session 2002 and Rs, 134 lakhs during the session 2003 respectively. It also noticed that with the passing of time the rates of uniform items have decreased. The financial expenditure of Rs. 220 lakhs during 1997, Rs. 253 lakhs during 1998 for purchase of school uniforms have downsized till Rs. 151 lakhs during the session 2002 and Rs, 134 lakhs during the session 2003 respectively. The Planning Cell further observed that the outlay of more than Rs. 25 lakhs will be saved if the rates of 2003 session is accepted i. e. Rs. 149. 6 lakhs (tender estimate at NSP 78-80) minus Rs. 124. 22 lakhs (tentative estimate of proposal at NSP 70-73 ). It accordingly agreed with the recommendations made by the tender committee which were finally placed before the Cabinet in its meeting held on 30-1-2004. After due deliberation the Cabinet approved and sanctioned the proposal and the amount involved in the proposal. On 4-2-2004 work orders have been issued to the successful bidders. The allegations of the petitioner that the State Government surreptitiously processed the file and illegally approved the tenders of respondents 2 to 5 have been denied. ( 4 ) RESPONDENTS 2 and 3 have filed separate counter-affidavits supporting the stand taken by the State Government. The petitioner has also filed rejoinder to the counter-affidavits of the respondents 1 to 3. ( 5 ) MAY it be stated that when the Government deals with public by way of purchasing goods, for it or awards contracts or leases out or otherwise deals with its property, it cannot act arbitrarily and enter into relationship with any person it likes at its sweet will. In all such cases the action of the Government must pass the twin test of reasonableness and public interest. As has been held by the Supreme Court in Mahabir Auto Stores v. Indian Oil Corporation, AIR 1990 SC 1031, the State acts in its executive power under Art. 298 of the constitution in entering or not entering in contracts with individual parties. Article 14 of the Constitution would be applicable to those exercise of power. Therefore, action of the State can be checked under Art. 14. Every action of the State executive authority must be subject to rule of law and must be informed by reason. If a Governmental action even in the matters of entering or not entering into contracts, fails to satisfy the test of reasonableness, the same would be unreasonable. Therefore, action of the State can be checked under Art. 14. Every action of the State executive authority must be subject to rule of law and must be informed by reason. If a Governmental action even in the matters of entering or not entering into contracts, fails to satisfy the test of reasonableness, the same would be unreasonable. Judicial review under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the arena of contract has been considered by the Supreme Court in Tata cellular v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 651 : (AIR 1996 SC 11) wherein it has been held as follows : 'the duty of the Court is to confine itself to the question of legality. Its concern should be:1. Whether a decision making authority exceeds its powers,2. committed an error of law,3. committed a breach of the rules of natural justice. 4. reached a decision which no reasonable tribunal would have reached or,5. abused its powers. Therefore, it is not for the Court to determine whether a particular policy or particular decision taken in the fulfilment of that policy is fair. It is only concerned with the manner in which those decisions have been taken. The extent of the duty to act fairly will vary from case to case. Shortly put, the grounds, upon which an administrative action is subject to control by judicial review can be classified as under : (i) Illegality : This means the decision maker must understand correctly the law that regulates his decision making power and must give effect to it; (ii) Irrationality namely, Wednesbury unreasonableness, (iii) Procedural impropriety. The above are only the broad grounds but it does not rule out additional of further groundsin course of time. " keeping the above law in view, let us examine if this Court in exercise of the power of the judicial review under Art. 226 of the constitution can interfere with the impugned decision of the State Government. The tender committee and the planning cell on examination of the rates and samples submitted by the tenderers have found that the tenders of respondents 2 to 5 both with regard to the rates and samples are reasonable and of acceptable quality in all respects as detailed below : Name Rate Qantity Amount M/s. B. D. Enterprise (respondent 2) Rs. 65. 00 49605 Rs. 32,24,325. 00 M/s. B. D. Enterprise (respondent 2) Rs. 65. 00 45347 Rs. 65. 00 49605 Rs. 32,24,325. 00 M/s. B. D. Enterprise (respondent 2) Rs. 65. 00 45347 Rs. 29,47,555. 00 M/s. Kalimpong Stores (respondent 3) Rs. 99. 50 47720 Rs. 47,48,140. 00 M/s. Yes Sir Collection (respondent 4) Rs. 64. 25 34748 Rs. 22,32,559. 00 M/s. Samrat Rs. 94. 00 12212 Rs. 11,47,928. 00 M/s. North East Agency (respondent 5) Rs. 333. 00 280 Rs. 93,240. 00 Total Rs. 1,43,93,747. 00 S. T. Extra for all firms except respondent 5 S. T. @ 4% Rs. 5. 72,020. 00 SSI Unit M/s. Samrat Rs. 1,49,65,767. 00 Contingency for distribution charges Transport, head load etc. Rs. 1,00,000. 00 Grand Total Rs. 1,50,65,767. 00 Importance was laid on good quality school uniforms including quality of stitching, making of pleats/folds, proper pockets etc. because it should withstand the 'wear and tear' for the entire academic year. The financial aspect was also examined and it was found that cost of purchase of school uniforms during earlier years was much higher than the present cost (In 1997/1998 cost was to the tune of Rs. 220 lakhs/rs. 253 lakhs respectively whereas the present cost is projected around Rs. 150. 66 lakhs.)From the above, it may be seen that after taking all relevant aspects, ultimate decision was taken to accept the tenders of respondents 2 to 5. We also do riot find any extraneous, irrelevant or unreasonable factor crept into the decision making process. Having considered the facts and circumstances within the parameters of law leading to the acceptance of tenders of respondents 2 to 5, we are of the opinion that the impugned decision does not call for any interference in public interest by a writ Court. ( 6 ) IT was contended that the petitioner being a small scale industry registered with the Industries Department of the Government, its offer should have been accepted. We do not find any merit in the above contention. It is true that in the 'notice inviting tender' it was stated that preference/ weightage would be given to local small scale industrial units which are registered with the Industries Department. The said stipulation does not mean that at the cost of quality of uniforms, preference or weightage would be given to a small scale industrial unit. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner took exception to the composition of the selection committee for processing the tenders. The said stipulation does not mean that at the cost of quality of uniforms, preference or weightage would be given to a small scale industrial unit. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner took exception to the composition of the selection committee for processing the tenders. It may be noted that in the counter-affidavit filed by the State Government it was indicated that such a committee was constituted consisting of seven officers taken from different departments. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, an officer of the State Trading Corporation should have been taken as one of the members of the committee as required by the Sikkim Financial Rules, 1979. A close reading of the aforesaid would indicate that it is a part of annexure to Rule 127 of the Sikkim Financial Rules 1979 which deals with the subject of "purchase of stores". Therefore, the word "tenders" mentioned therein, obviously refers to the chapter dealing with "purchase of store materials". The present purchase of school uniforms does not come under the subject of "purchase of store materials. " In any case, absence of an officer of the State Trading corporation in the selection committee does not affect its recommendation in absence of clear and positive prohibition with regard to the formation of the committee. ( 8 ) WE also do not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel that the petitioner's rates being lowest, its tenders ought to have been accepted. This submission is also not factually correct inasmuch as the petitioner is not the lowest tenderer for all the items. The quality of the uniforms cannot be compromised merely because rates offered by some of the tenderers in respect of some items were the lowest. ( 9 ) FOR the reasons aforesaid, we do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Petition dismissed. --- *** ---