JUDGMENT Hon’ble A.K. Yog, J.—All the petitioners, who claim to be the Contractors, have filed above Writ Petitions, being aggrieved as the Respondent No. 2-Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad (called ‘Parishad’) has been compelling them to deposit 10% of ‘estimated cost of work’ in question at the time of filing of ‘Tender-form/Application’. According to the petitioners there is no legal sanction or authority for imposing such condition; the Parishad is not competent to ask for such and this act of the Parishad is arbitrary and un-reasonable. 2. On the joint request of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the above writ petitions (shown in the printed cause list and the Computer List), are being taken up together as they are based on similar facts and one similar issue is required to be adjudicated by this Court. 3. To appreciate the controversy in hand, facts pertaining to Writ Petition No. 35771 of 2005 (M/s. Jal Akash v. State of U.P. and others) alone are noted hereunder for the sake of convenience and to avoid repetition. 4. The petitioner, who claims to be registered as ‘A Class’ Contractor, submitted tender application in response to notice published by Deputy Director (Construction) of the Parishad/ Respondent No. 4 inviting ‘Tenders’ for execution of certain ‘works’. 5. The petitioner points out that special condition No. 1 of the impugned ‘Tender notice’ dated 4-4-2005 (Annexure-2 to the petition), informed that ‘Tender-Form’ and details of ‘Terms & Conditions’ of ‘Tender’ could be collected during working days on or before May 3, 2005 from the office of the Parishad; the said ‘tender-notice’ nowhere required a contractor to furnish 10% of the estimated cost of work contract as ‘earnest money’; para-18 of Schedule XIX of the Financial Hand Book-Vol. V-Part-I, /Annexure-4 to the petition prescribes rates of ‘earnest money’ required to be deposited at the time of submitting tender form/application. The rates prescribed therein are slabwise and varies from 2% to 2.5%. V-Part-I, /Annexure-4 to the petition prescribes rates of ‘earnest money’ required to be deposited at the time of submitting tender form/application. The rates prescribed therein are slabwise and varies from 2% to 2.5%. The said para 18 reads : ÞlHkh fufonk;sa mu fofgr izk:i ls isk dh tk;s tks fd vkisf{kr gksus ij vkosnu rFkk Hkqxrku ij izkIr dh tk ldsA fdlh Hkh VsUMj ij rc rd fopkj u fd;k tk;s tc rd fd mlds lkFk vfxze /ku u fn;k tk;s tSlk fd uhps fn;k x;k gS& fufonk dh jkfk vfxze /ku #i;k ¼1½ 2000 #0 rd 50-00 ¼2½ 2000 #0 ls T;knk 5000 ls T;knk ugha 100-00 ¼3½ 4000 #0 ls T;knk fdUrq 10]000 ls T;knk ugha 200-00 ¼4½ izR;sd vfrfjDr 5000 #0 ;k mlds Hkkx ij 100-00 fufonk Bsdk izkf/kdkjh mijksDr fofgr nj ls U;wu nj ij vfxze dh /kujkfk fofgr dj ldrs gSa ;fn fdlh dkj.k ls ,slk fd;k tkuk ijkekZnk;h gks ldsA fdUrq dk;Z ds ewY;kadu en ls 1@2 izfrkr ls vfxze /ku de ugha gksuk pkfg,A fVIi.kh-&¼1½ yksd fuekZ.k foHkkx ds ,d vf/kkklh vfHk;ark Lofoosd ij fcuk vfxze /ku ds 5000 #0 ls U;wukf/kd nj ds ÞjksM esMy laxzg.kß ds dk;Z dks fcuk vfxze /ku ds Lohdkj dj ldrs gSa rFkk 10]000 #0 ls U;wukf/kd jkfk ds dk;Z dh nkk esa vf/kkklh vfHk;ark ;k vU; vf/kdkjh Lofoosd ls izR;sd fufonk ij dsoy mu Bhdsnkjksa ls ftudh fufonk Lohdkj dh xbZ gS ls vfxze /ku dh ekax dj ldsaxsAß 6. G.P.W. form-8 of Public Works Department, U.P. Lucknow/Annexure-5 to the petition contains same rates of earnest-money as prescribed vide Financial Hand Book (referred to above); the expression *c;kus* is used in GPW-form 8, PWD. The equivalent expression for *c;kuk* in Hindi is *iskxh* and in English it is ‘Advance-Money’; with reference to Tender’ it refers to ‘Earnest Money’; according to clause 6 of GPW Form 8- it is to be refunded in case Tender’ is not accepted and the declaration proforma at the bottom of said form makes it clear that ‘security’ is to be given after Tender is accepted and Work Contract is to be signed/executed. 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondents contended that a prospective contractor is required to deposit 10% of estimated cost of work at the time of filing Tender’ in view of the recommendations of the Regional Deputy Directors of the Parishad vide its minutes dated 21-7-2001. 8. 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondents contended that a prospective contractor is required to deposit 10% of estimated cost of work at the time of filing Tender’ in view of the recommendations of the Regional Deputy Directors of the Parishad vide its minutes dated 21-7-2001. 8. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents (sworn by Kamal Kishore Gupta, Assistant Accounts Officer-Construction Division, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, Bareilly). In the said counter affidavit, it is not denied that the ‘stipulations’ contained in Financial Hand Book are applicable. Reference is made to Article 363 of Financial Hand Book, Vol. VI, Chapter-Ill which says : “The amount of earnest money to be deposited would be sufficiently large to be a security against loss, in case of the contractor failing to furnish required security within the appointed time after the acceptance of his tender, until sums due to him form sufficient guarantee, as the case may be. “ (See para-7 of said Counter-Affidavit) 9. In para 8 of this Counter Affidavit it is contended that the petitioner accepted ‘terms and conditions’ given in ‘tender-notice’ dated 3-5-2005. Clause-3 of the Tender Form’ (quoted in said para 8 of the Counter Affidavit) reads : “The amount of security to be deposited by the tenderer for the due performance of all the conditions of the contract shall be a sum equal to 10% of the tendered amount to be deposited with the Deputy Director (Const.)." 10. The respondents have also quoted clause-8 of the ‘Tender-Form’ which reads : “The person whose tender is accepted shall sign an agreement embodying the conditions of contract thereto attached within 7 days after receiving written notice from the Deputy Director (Const.) that his tender has been accepted and shall pay all stamps and legal expenses incident thereto and shall deposit Bank Draft or Government Securities endorsed to the Dy. Director (Const.) Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, Lucknow a sum amounting of Rs. 2 to 10% of total tender cost as security for the due performance of the contract. Such Government securities shall be accepted at their marked value. In the event of failure by the said tenderer to sign agreement of contract or deposit the said security within seven days mentioned aforesaid after being called upon to do so by the Dy. 2 to 10% of total tender cost as security for the due performance of the contract. Such Government securities shall be accepted at their marked value. In the event of failure by the said tenderer to sign agreement of contract or deposit the said security within seven days mentioned aforesaid after being called upon to do so by the Dy. Director (Const.) Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, Lucknow the whole amount of earnest money deposited as aforesaid shall be forfeited to the Parishad and the transaction by the tender shall cease and determine." 11. A copy of the aforesaid ‘Form of Tender’ has been filed as Annexure CA-1 to the Counter Affidavit. 12. It further provides that in the event of failure of the said Tenderer to sign ‘agreement of contract’ or deposit “security” when called upon to do so, deposit of ‘Earnest Money’ as part of submitting ‘Tender’ (referred as ‘security money’ in the end of said clause) shall be forfeited. The above is clear from the fact that expression ‘earnest money’ used in the end of the said clause-refers to the-expression ‘security money’ used in earlier part of the said clause. 13. According to the respondents, ‘Parishad’ took decision in its meeting held on 21-7-2001 and framed ‘General Rules and Directions for the Guidance of Tenderers’ (Annexure-CA-2 to the counter affidavit) and referred to the following clause : ÞorZeku O;oLFkkuqlkj ^,* Js.kh ds Bsdsnkjksa dks ,d yk[k dh flD;ksfjVh tek djus ds mijkUr iwjs mÙkj iznsk esa dk;Z djus dh vuqefr jgrh gS] ftlls os viuh {kerk ls vf/kd dk;Z ys ysrs gS ijUrq dk;Z le; ls iw.kZ ugha djk ikrs gSA flD;ksfjVh /kujkfk ,d leku vk/kkj ij ykxw fd;s tkus gsrq fopkj fd;k x;k rFkk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k fd leLr Js.kh ds Bsdsnkjksa ls izR;sd dk;Z dh 10 izfrkr /kujkfk dks flD;ksfjVh euh ds :i esa tek djk;k tk;sAß 14. Aforesaid minutes have been perused but we fail to find any condition requiring a tenderer to deposit 10% of the estimated cost of work contract at the time of filing ‘tender-application’ itself. In fact the said minute provides that instead of flat rate of security of Rupees One Lakh in respect of ‘A Class’ Contractors under the prevailing system, security money equivalent to 10% of estimated cost of every ‘contract-work’ should be deposited by these contractors. 15. In fact the said minute provides that instead of flat rate of security of Rupees One Lakh in respect of ‘A Class’ Contractors under the prevailing system, security money equivalent to 10% of estimated cost of every ‘contract-work’ should be deposited by these contractors. 15. We find no clause anywhere which require a contractor to deposit 10% of the estimated cost of work at the time of filing ‘tender-application’. 16. Sri Ved Vyas Misra, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Parishad placed Photostat copy of ‘High Power Tender Committee Recommendation/decision’. From the said Photostat copy he has referred to the following clause : ÞvuqcU/k iathdj.k ds le; Bsdsnkj }kjk mifunskd ¼fu0½ ds i{k esa 10 izfrkr vusZLV euh tekur /kujkfk flD;ksfjVh ds :i esa tek dh tk;sxh tks dk;Z lekfIr dh okLrfod frfFk ds 06 ekg ;k ,d o"kkZ _rq tks ckn esa gks] ds ipkr dk;Z lUrks"k tud gksus dh fLFkfr esa 5 izfrkr vusZLV euh dh /kujkfk okil dh tk;sxh] ks”k 5 izfrkr vusZLV euh dh /kujkfk fuekZ.k dk;Z iw.kZ gksus dh okfLrfod frfFk ls 03 o"kZ rd dk;Z lUrks"ktud gksus dh fLFkfr esa gh okil dh tk;sxhAß 17. Aforesaid clause provides that 10% ‘earnest-money’/ *tekur /kujkfk* as ‘security’ is required to be deposited at the time of ‘registration’ of work-contract-agreement. The said decision of ‘High Power Committee’ also does not help the respondents. 18. Copy of Short Term Tender Notice dated 17-3-2006, probably following aforesaid ‘High Power Tender Committee Decision’, is Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition No. 40236 of 2006 (Hukum Chand v. State of U.P. and others). Condition No. 5 (under Title *Ádkku ds fy, ugha* reads: ÞfufeZr djk;s tkus okys lEidZ ekxZ dh tek /kjksgj /kujkfk 10 izfrkr esa ls 5 izfrkr dk;Z iw.kZ gksus dh okLrfod frfFk ls 6 ekg ;k ,d cjlkr ds mijkUr okil tks Hkh ckn esa gksxh dh tk;sxh rFkk ks"k 5 izfrkr /kujkfk dks rhu o"kZ vuqj{k.k vof/k iw.kZ gksus ds i’pkr okil dh tk;sxhAß 19. Word used is in aforequoted Condition No. 5 is */kjksgj* with reference to FDR, and NSC required to be deposited with Deputy Director (Construction) Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and provides for its refund after completion of ‘Contract-Work’ which shows that 10% security money (called-Dharohar) is in lieu of Work Contract/Agreement and not the Tender. 20. Word used is in aforequoted Condition No. 5 is */kjksgj* with reference to FDR, and NSC required to be deposited with Deputy Director (Construction) Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and provides for its refund after completion of ‘Contract-Work’ which shows that 10% security money (called-Dharohar) is in lieu of Work Contract/Agreement and not the Tender. 20. According to Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary by R.S. Mc Gregor Hindi word */kjksgj* means-"entrusted to another, a charge, trust, deposit, pledge... serving as a deposit” 21. It is therefore, clear that word */kjksgj* used in short term Tender Notice’ dated 17-3-2006 (referred to above) refers to ‘security money’ to be paid (after the tender is accepted) at the stage of execution/registration of ‘work contract’ to ensure fulfilment of ‘terms and conditions’ of ‘work contract’ and in case of failure to discharge obligation under the contract, the liability to face consequence of forfeiture of said security amount. 22. ‘Earnest-Money’ is the money required to be deposited to ensure that person submitting ‘Tender Application’ is ‘genuine tenderer’, his ‘offer’ is ‘bona fide’ and in all earnestness and he wants to undertake the ‘work’ with ‘genuine’ intentions. According to Oxford English Dictionary the word ‘earnest’ is defined as-extremely serious’, ‘with sincere and serious intention. ‘Earnest Money’, in the context of Tender, is required to be deposited by a Tenderer at the time of submitting Tender Application to ensure that ‘Tender’ submitted by concerned party is genuine. 23. It is, therefore, clear that ‘earnest money’ (generally 2%) required at the time of filing ‘Tender Application’ is not to be confused with ‘security money’ required after tender is accepted and at the stage of execution of work contract. 24. Apparently by using different expressions like */kjksgj* or *c;kus* or ‘earnest money’ for ‘security money’, required to be deposited with ‘Tender-Form’ and the other (by one whose Tender is accepted) at the time of execution/registration of Work-Contract on two different stages, a confusion has been created. 25. ‘Earnest money’ is to be deposited at the time of submission of tender at the rate mentioned in the Financial Hand Book Vol. V Part I Schedule XIX para 18 and it cannot be charged at a rate higher than that mentioned in the Financial Hand Book. The requirement of deposit of 10% of the tender amount as */kjksgj* (security) shall come into play only after acceptance of the tender and not before that. V Part I Schedule XIX para 18 and it cannot be charged at a rate higher than that mentioned in the Financial Hand Book. The requirement of deposit of 10% of the tender amount as */kjksgj* (security) shall come into play only after acceptance of the tender and not before that. The two terms (viz. vfxze /kujkfk@/kjksgj&tekur) have been used loosely and apparently they have been interchanged. 26. Learned Counsel for the respondents has failed to show us any ‘sanction’ for compelling the petitioner to deposit 10% of estimated cost of ‘work-contract’ at the time of submitting ‘tender application’. Requiring a contractor to deposit 10% of security money at the time of submitting ‘tender-form’ does not stand to reason apart from the fact that it has no legal sanction. 27. Consequently, Respondents cannot force Tenderers/Applicants to deposit 10% of estimated cost of contract-work’ at the time of submitting ‘Tender’. 28. A writ of mandamus is hereby issued directing the respondents not to enforce requirement of ‘condition’ of 10% of estimated cost of work contract at the time of submitting ‘Tender Form/Application’ and not to reject ‘Tender-Form’ for non-compliance of such condition. 29. Present writ petition as well as other connected writ petitions are allowed. No order as to costs. Petitions Allowed. ———