JUDGMENT By the Court.—M/s Kanha Construction is before this Court with the following prayers : (I) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari calling for the record and to quash the Condition No. 1(b) and Condition No. 18 of the Manual of Registration/Renewal of contractors issued by respondent No. 3. (II) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari calling for the record and to quash the Tender Notices dated 29.8.2016 and 30.8.2016 issued by respondent No. 3. (III) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to restrict the petitioner for taking contract of works below 2 crore. 2. Brief background of the case is that petitioner’s firm is a registered Contractor and name of petitioner’s firm finds place in the list of contractors. For the purpose of awarding contract, the process of registration of contractor and the renewal is carried out by the Aligarh Development Authority. For the said purpose, Aligarh Development Authority has framed Rules namely “Aligarh Development Authority, Rules of Renewal/Registration of Contractors” (hereinafter referred to as the “Manual”). Petitioner’s Firm is registered under Cagetory-A of contractors for construction works. As per Clause 1(b) of the Manual, the working capacity of the petitioner’s firm is ‘Unlimited’ and the petitioner’s firm is entitled to take tenders starting from Rs. 2 crore to unlimited. In the special circumstances, the registered contractor can be awarded contract of a category below one category of their registered category. 3. From the record in question, this much is reflected that petitioner’s firm got registered under Category-A with the Department concerned for construction work and at the said point of time when the form has been filled, the petitioner’s firm has undertaken to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement. Petitioner, at this juncture, has approached this Court and his submission is that Condition No. 1(b) and Condition No. 18 of Manual of Registration/Renewal of Contractors issued by Executive Engineer, Aligarh Development Authority, Ramghat Road, Aligarh be quashed and in the tender notices that have been so issued, petitioner’s firm be accorded permission to participate in the said tendering process. 4. A Supplementary-affidavit has been filed and therein mention has been made that in the year 2011, petitioner even being A Category contractor was given tender of Rs. 4. A Supplementary-affidavit has been filed and therein mention has been made that in the year 2011, petitioner even being A Category contractor was given tender of Rs. 2.30 lakhs which falls in Category-D and similarly the other contractors has also been allowed to take contract of any amount if it is within its working limit irrespective of the fact in the lower limit prescribed as per the category. 5. Requisite instructions have been obtained and thereafter with the consent of the parties, present Writ Petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal. 6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that categorization of contractors have been done with regard to their capability to the maximum for which work contract can be awarded in its favour and once petitioner has been categorized as Class-A contractor, then ipso facto petitioner cannot be presumed to stand disqualified for applying for the work contract that covers the Category-B, C and D and in view of this, the restriction that has been so imposed is totally arbitrary and unjustifiable and interference is liable to be made. 7. Learned Standing Counsel as well as the counsel representing the Aligarh Development Authority, on the other hand, contended that petitioner, on its own, has applied for being categorized as Category-A Contractor and at the point of time when petitioner has sought to be registered in Category-A, therein the petitioner can execute the contract starting from the tune of Rs. 2 crore upto unlimited and in special circumstances, apart from his own category, he can be asked to execute contract for one category below and in view of this, petitioner cannot turn its back and proceed to question the validity of the said conditions in question. 8. After respective arguments have been advanced, the factual situation that is so emerging is that Aligarh Development Authority has framed Rules namely Aligarh Development Authority, Rules of Renewal/Registration of Contractors, as per which for getting registered requisite exercise is required to be undertaken. 8. After respective arguments have been advanced, the factual situation that is so emerging is that Aligarh Development Authority has framed Rules namely Aligarh Development Authority, Rules of Renewal/Registration of Contractors, as per which for getting registered requisite exercise is required to be undertaken. Clause 1(b) of the aforementioned manual deals with following category of Contractors: ^,^ Js.kh :i;s 2 djksM+ ls vlhfer ^ch^ Js.kh :i;s 75 yk[k ls :i;s 2 djksM+ ^lh^ Js.kh :i;s 40 yk[k ls :i;s 75 yk[k ^Mh^ Js.kh :i;s 40 rd ^lh^ Js.kh Clause 18 of the Agreement provides for as follows: ^^iathÑr Bsdsnkj nks viuh Js.kh ds vykok ,d Js.kh fuEu rd Hkh dk;Z fo'ks"k ifjfLrfFk esa fn;k tk ldrk gSA** 9. Petitioner, in his turn, has proceeded to get itself registered as Class-A Contractor and in the said direction, has proceeded to fill up the form mentioning therein that it would abide by all the terms and conditions. Petitioner thus, in pith and substance, has accepted that petitioner should be registered as Class-A Contractor wherein the contract in question that has to be executed starts from Rs. 2 crore upto unlimited. For Class-B Contractor, amount starts from Rs. 75 lakhs to Rs. 2 crore. For Class-C Contractor, amount starts from Rs. 40 lakhs to Rs. 75 lakhs. For Class-D Contractor, amount is upto Rs. 40 lakhs and thereafter for Class E Category. This registration is done by the Aligarh Development Authority looking into the request that has been made by the Firm in question appending therein the work carried out in last three financial years, the experience certificate and the number of staff engaged. 10. Once petitioner has got itself registered as Class-A Contractor and petitioner is conscious of this fact that based on the said registration in question, petitioner is entitled to participate in the contract starting from Rs. 2 crore and above and in exceptional situation as per Clause 18, the Contractor in question, apart from his category of contract, can be given contract of one category below i.e. in reference of B Category contracts. 11. Petitioner’s submission before this Court is that once the Firm is a registered as ‘A’ Level Contractor, then the same is liable to apply in all level of contracts i.e. to participate in B Category Contracts, C Category contracts and D Category contracts even without being registered for the said category. 11. Petitioner’s submission before this Court is that once the Firm is a registered as ‘A’ Level Contractor, then the same is liable to apply in all level of contracts i.e. to participate in B Category Contracts, C Category contracts and D Category contracts even without being registered for the said category. The terms and conditions of the tender clearly proceeds to make a mention about the incumbents, who would be entitled to participate in tendering process. Clause 1(A) read with Clause 18 is very very clear and the petitioner, in its turn, at the point of time when it got itself registered, had agreed to such a situation, then petitioner cannot proceed to turn its back and say that the said terms and conditions are bad and are liable to be scrapped out. The said policy decision is a purposive one for the simple reason that in case A Category contractor is permitted to participate in contracts, then the net effect of the same would be that based on money power entire contract in question would be taken by A Category Contractors and after bragging the contract in question, a monopolized business would be sought to be created by further sub engaging Class C and D Contractors. 12. The purpose behind classification is to allot work as per the categorization and in certain special contingencies one category below. Nothing prevents the petitioner’s firm from getting itself registered under other categories and in view of this, as far as we are concerned, we are not inclined to accept the arguments that has been addressed on behalf of petitioner for questioning the said conditions and specially in the backdrop when the said conditions formed part of the agreement and petitioner is signatory to the same. 13. Petitioner’s counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1754 of 2015 (M/s Kanha Constructions v. State of U.P. and 2 others), wherein mention has been made that categorization of Contractors is done having regard to their capability to the maximum, for which work contract can be awarded in their favour. A further mention has been made that if persons like the petitioner, who have been categorized as ‘B’ class contractor, are suitable to perform works up to Rs. A further mention has been made that if persons like the petitioner, who have been categorized as ‘B’ class contractor, are suitable to perform works up to Rs. 94 lacs, it would not mean that they stands disqualified for applying for the work contract which is covered within the category of ‘C’ and ‘D’ class contractors, in the facts of the case for contract of work of Rs. 39 lacs. It has been mentioned that the value of the work up to which a ‘B’ class contractor is registered would also include the value of the work contract which are below the maximum fixed for ‘B’ class contractor. Mention has also been made that the purpose for inviting the tender in the matter of execution of work contract is to ensure that the work is done at lowest possible rate keeping in mind the nature of the constructions and quality of the constructions required. Therefore also exclusion of persons like the petitioner from the zone of consideration and limiting the same to ‘D’ class contractors only, appears to be arbitrary and will not achieve the purpose of inviting the tenders for settling the work contract. In the said case condition imposed in the advertisement restricting the same to ‘D’ class contractors was held to be arbitrary and unjustified, therefore violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore the advertisement dated 7.1.2014 was hereby quashed. 14. Here in the present case, the distinguishing feature is that petitioner itself has proceeded to apply to be registered as A Class Contractor and the terms and conditions were clear and categorical providing therein the work that was liable to be executed by petitioner and the contingency in which said condition could be relaxed, wherein petitioner could be permitted to apply for lower one category, in view of this, once the petitioner itself has proceeded to agree to the said terms and conditions, then the said judgment will not at all come to the rescue and reprieve of the petitioner as therein the advertisement was assailed whereas here the terms of the agreement that has been agreed upon by the petitioner is being sought to be assailed. 15. Writ Petition sans merit and the same is dismissed accordingly.