JUDGMENT Alok Singh, J. 1. Petitioner claiming himself Contractor is assailing the tender notice dated 30th November, 2014. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Uttarakhand Procurement Rules, 2008, tender notice ought to have been published at least two widely circulated national newspapers; as per Rule 13 (5) of the Uttarakhand Procurement Rules, minimum three weeks’ time from the date of publication of the tender notice should be given to submit the bids. In the present case, tender notice was not published in two widely circulated national newspapers and minimum three weeks’ time was not granted to submit the bids. In paragraph No.4 of the writ petition, it is stated that petitioner went office of respondent No.2 on 08.12.2014 to purchase the tender papers, however, petitioner was not allowed to purchase the papers notice saying before purchase of the tender papers, petitioner had to deposit F.D.R. of Rs.50,000/-. 3. As per the tender notice, bids were to be submitted till 3:00 P.M. on 09.12.2014. 4. As to whether petitioner was denied tender documents on account of non furnishing of F.D.R. of Rs.50,000/- is a question of fact which cannot be gone into in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. In my humble opinion, Uttarakhand Procurement Rules, 2008, as far as possible, should be followed, however, strict non compliance of Procurement Rules would not vitiate the tender notice. Even sub-clause (5) of Rule 13 of the Procurement Rules says, ordinarily, three weeks’ time should be granted in a tender notice. It means in every case, three weeks’ time is not required. Moreover, it is nowhere stated that cost of the contract was more than Rs.25 lacs, therefore, publication of tender notice in two national newspapers was not mandatory. Simply because petitioner was not allowed to participate in the tender notice, even it is presumed to be correct, is no ground to quash the tender notice or to issue the mandamus to issue fresh tender notice. Therefore, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.