Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 241 (ALL)

Akash Constructions Company v. State Of U. P.

2013-01-18

SATYA POOT MEHROTRA, ZAKI ULLAH KHAN

body2013
The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter-alia, praying for quashing the Order dated 26.09.2012 (Annexure-11 to the Writ Petition) and its consequential Order dated 06.10.2012 (Annexure-12 to the Writ Petition), passed by the District Magistrate, Hapur (Respondent No. 2). 2. It appears that an Advertisement dated 25.04.2012 was published in the Newspapers on 26.04.2012 inviting tenders for grant of contract for collection of Loading/Unloading Parking Fee. Pursuant to the said Advertisement, the petitioner and four other persons submitted their tenders. When tenders were opened, only two tenders were found to fulfil the Technical Bid Requirements. One of the said two tenders was submitted by the petitioner, while the other tender was submitted by Smt. Deepa Chaudhary. The tender submitted by the petitioner was the highest. However, the tender submitted by the petitioner was not accepted. Thereupon, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition before this Court being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35255 of 2012. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court by the Order dated 24.07.2012 (Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition) giving liberty to the petitioner to approach such other alternative Forum available to him in law for redressal of his grievances. The petitioner, thereafter, submitted its Representation dated 1st August, 2012 before the District Magistrate, Hapur (Respondent No. 2). Copy of the said Representation has been filed as Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition. 3. The District Magistrate, Hapur, after obtaining Report from the Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad, Hapur (Respondent No. 4), considered the matter and passed the Order dated 26.09.2012 rejecting the Representation submitted by the petitioner. 4. Pursuant to the Order dated 26.09.2012, the District Magistrate, Hapur, issued further Order dated 06.10.2012 directing for taking fresh proceedings for auction of Theka for collection of Parking Fee. Copy of the said Order dated 26.09.2012 has been filed as Annexure-11 to the Writ Petition, while copy of the said Order dated 06.10.2012 has been filed as Annexure-12 to the Writ Petition. 5. In passing the Order dated 26.09.2012, it has, inter-alia, been noted that there must be at least three tenders before the question of acceptance of tender may be considered. In the present case, only two tenders fulfilling the Technical Requirements were found to be valid. In the circumstances, the requirement of having at least three tenders was not fulfilled. 5. In passing the Order dated 26.09.2012, it has, inter-alia, been noted that there must be at least three tenders before the question of acceptance of tender may be considered. In the present case, only two tenders fulfilling the Technical Requirements were found to be valid. In the circumstances, the requirement of having at least three tenders was not fulfilled. It has further been noted that keeping in view the realisation of Rs. 79,631/- made by the Palika employees in the month of April, 2012, realisation of Rs. 9,55,572/- was possible in a year while the bid submitted by the petitioner was only for Rs. 4,53,000/-. 6. Having noted above aspects and various other relevant aspects, the District Magistrate, Hapur (Respondent No. 2) has passed the Order dated 26.09.2012, rejecting the Representation submitted by the petitioner. 7. No illegality or infirmity has been shown in the said Order dated 26.09.2012 passed by the District Magistrate, Hapur. The Order dated 06.10.2012 is only consequential order, pursuant to the said Order dated 26.09.2012. No excedption can be taken to the Order dated 06.10.2012. 8. It is further noteworthy that in the General Instructions contained in the Tender Document (Annexure 2 to the Writ Petition), Instruction No. 8 reads as under:- 9. Therefore, the Nagar Palika Parishad, Hapur (Respondent No. 4) was within its right in not accepting the tender submitted by the petitioner and in deciding to invite fresh tenders. 10. It is also noteworthy that no acceptance of the offer submitted by the petitioner was ever made by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Hapur. The petitioner has thus got no right against the respondent No. 4. 11. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner lacks merits, and the same is liable to the dismissed. The Writ Petition is accordingly, dismissed.