JUDGMENT : Biswanath Somadder, J. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be taken on record. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 2. The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 18th December, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in WP 24988 (W) of 2018 (Vijoy Singh vs. HPCL & Anr.). By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Single Judge proceeded to dismiss the writ petition for reasons stated therein. 3. The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner. 4. The issue before the learned Single Judge was in respect of a notice inviting e-tender which was published in 23rd August, 2018, by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. In the backdrop of this tender notice, the writ petitioner prayed, inter alia, for the following relief:- "(a) A Writ of and/or in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding the respondent authorities and each one of them, their men, agents, staffs, subordinates and associates to withdraw the purported decision taken not to accept the bid submitted by your petitioner for uplifting his own requirement of products as an authorized dealer of the respondent no.1 through his own tank-truck." 5. The learned Single Judge considered the respective contentions of the parties and proceeded to make the following observation:- "Records reveal that the date of submission of tender along with TRC was specified to be on 27th September, 2018 and the said NIT was published in the month of August, 2018. The petitioner applied for TRC on 27th September, 2018 itself even though it was within his knowledge that for submission of the bid, the TRC is mandatorily required. The delay to apply for TRC is attributable to the petitioner and presently, the tender process is also over. In view thereof, this Court is reluctant to exercise any discretion in favour of the petitioner." 6. In an Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal, interference is usually warranted only when palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed on a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order. In the facts of the instant case, we do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity on a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order. That apart and in any event, the impugned judgment and order is supported with cogent and justifiable reasons. 7. In the facts of the instant case, we do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity on a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order. That apart and in any event, the impugned judgment and order is supported with cogent and justifiable reasons. 7. The appeal and the application for stay, therefore, are liable to be dismissed and stand accordingly dismissed. 8. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. Arindam Mukherjee, J. - I agree.