ORDER : J.B.PARDIWALA. J. 1. The learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant proposes to amend the writ application by filing the draft amendment. By way of draft amendment the writ applicant proposes to implead (1) the State of Gujarat, Industries and Mine Department, (2) the Commissioner of Industry, Industry Commissioner Office and (3) M/s. Apex Constructions, Kheda (the Company in whose favour the work order has already been issued) as party respondents. However, as we are not inclined to entertain this writ application having regard to the specific stance of the respondent No.2 as reflected from the affidavitinreply, allowing the draft amendment would be a futile exercise. 2. By this application under Section 226 of the Constitution of India the writ applicant has prayed for the following relief : “(A) Your Lordship may be please to allow the present petition. (B) Your Lordship may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ in nature of mandamus directing Respondent authority to set aside the decision taken dated 17.03.2021 and not opened the price bid of the petitioner at Annexure A and al so set aside the tender process adopted by the authority and direct authority to examine the documents submitted through Etender process as per Annexure D and open the price bid of petitioner being tender Id446569 at Nandesari G.I.D.C in the interest of justice. (C) Your Lordship maybe Please to pending admission hearing final disposal of the matter stay the further tender process of tender ID 446569 OF Nandesari GIDC and stay the communication dated 17.03.202 at Annexure A. (D) Your Lordship may be pleased to pass such an other relief in the interest of justice.” 3. It appears from the materials on record that the respondent No.1 – the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation issued a tender notice inviting bids from the interested parties to undertake the work of diversion of storm water drain at the GIDC estate, Nandesari with free maintenance guarantee for a period of five years. The estimated contract value (INR) is 127,332,800.00 (Twelve crores seventy three lakhs thirty two thousand eight hundred Only). The writ applicant herein offered his bid pursuant to the notice of the tender. The respondent No.2 undertook the exercise of the scrutiny of the bids received from different parties. 4. The estimated contract value (INR) is 127,332,800.00 (Twelve crores seventy three lakhs thirty two thousand eight hundred Only). The writ applicant herein offered his bid pursuant to the notice of the tender. The respondent No.2 undertook the exercise of the scrutiny of the bids received from different parties. 4. It appears that during the course of the examination of the papers submitted by the writ applicant it was noticed that the writ applicant is not technically qualified or does not possess the technical competitiveness of the bid. In such circumstances, the respondent No.2 by a written communication dated 17.3.2021 informed the writ applicant that the tender was not being opened due to lack of competitiveness of the bid. In such circumstances referred to above, the writ application came before this Court with the present writ application. 5. We have heard Mr. Dharmesh V. Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Paras K. Sukhwani, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 – Nandesari Industries Association. Mr. Sukhwani invited the attention of this Court to few relevant averments made in the affidavitinreply filed on behalf of the respondent No.2. We quote the relevant averments : “(a) Tender System & its Proceedings: tender; of construction works more than Rs.10/Crore, Three Bid cover System is adopted by Government Department wherein the Bidder is required to submit (i) Technical Bid and (ii) Price Bid on web portal and (iii) to provide all PreQualification documents in physical form at Employer's office in next couple of days after uploading the tender on web. There are two types of screening after opening the physical Technical bid. The First one, Preliminary screening is for checking completeness of documents including Company Credentials, Prequalification Statements, Financial capacity/turnover, experience details, MoU/J.V in order etc. The Secondary screening is for assessing strength of organization, management, manpower, machinery and above all the similar experience in specialized works. If and only if, a tenderer is qualified through these Preliminary and Secondary screening, the Price Bid is opened of that qualified tenderer. (b) Requirement & importance of Physical Documents : The Physical documents with real signature, company seal etc are believed to be more Authentic and reliable than that in soft copy. Documents in soft copy need to be verified with physical documents for its correctness. (b) Requirement & importance of Physical Documents : The Physical documents with real signature, company seal etc are believed to be more Authentic and reliable than that in soft copy. Documents in soft copy need to be verified with physical documents for its correctness. It is more comfortable to view large physical documents and derive PreQualification data rather than from soft copy in computer. It can help analyze the data faster and lead to early decision. The Respondent No.2 do require and ask for physical documents for the reasons of (i) Authenticity and (ii) easy to assess/extract useful data from large volume of documents in a short time line. It is a regular practice with all the Government Departments. The Technical Bid submission in Physical Form is First & foremost requirement. The soft copy is, the second requirement, meant to be duplicate copy for safe storage against damage, defacement, or theft of physical documents and long term safe preservation of Records. The very purposes for demanding physical and soft copy are different..... Ergo, the submission of Technical Bid in Physical form is not optional to the Soft copy. (c) Provision of Physical documents in this tender: The Respondent No.2, has specifically demanded documents in Physical form in: * Tender Notice (Biii) page no.7 & 8; * in Section 1(A) Information to Bidder, Physical submission Cl.21.3 filled up schedule "C" to "J"; (I) P.16 & * ....do..... Cl.21.4 two duplicate certified copies page no 16. The PreQualification documents and formats were to be submitted in both (i) soft copy on web portal as well as (ii) Physical copy with all PreQualification documents at the office of Respondent No.2 from 03/02/2021 to 06/02/2021 upto 17.00 hrs. (kindly refer Annexure A Page19). (d) Criteria for Experience are; * one single work of Rs.1620 lakhs or two works of Rs.540 Lakhs in a single year during last 5 financial years as per IFB Cl.2(i) page 4 and Sec 2 (A)(ii) page no 2425. * Experience in providing and fixing higher sizes than 1200+mm of PreCast RCC Drainage Sections; is the preferred experience in selection of the Contractor as per Tender Notice (A) Description of Works, Col4, stating 'Storm Water Drainage work with experience in Precast Drainage Sections preferred' and Section 1(A) cl.3 Page no.11. * Experience in providing and fixing higher sizes than 1200+mm of PreCast RCC Drainage Sections; is the preferred experience in selection of the Contractor as per Tender Notice (A) Description of Works, Col4, stating 'Storm Water Drainage work with experience in Precast Drainage Sections preferred' and Section 1(A) cl.3 Page no.11. (e) Opening the Physical Technical Bid : The Petitioner has submitted part set of the desired credentials of the Company and work completion certificate Forms 3(A) for 4 woks in Physical form; rest Pre-Qualification documents are not given/avoided to be given in physical form. It is incomplete Physical documents. The demand for complete Pre-Qualification documents, as per the Tender provisions, is not fulfilled (Kindly refer AnnexureB, serial No.5) The petitioner/Bidder has made submission of Full Set of physical documents, suo motu, optional to soft copy and uploaded full set in the web portal only, as is charged. By not providing the PreQualification documents in physical form the petitioner has made the situation difficult to analyze from 700 pages in soft copy to proving their Technical Competence as against 4 orderly Bidders. I say that all other 4 Bidders have submitted Full set of physical documents, copies etc; it is being in the regular submission and those are considered well in order. It is the Petitioner's belief, contrary to general belief, that has led to the dissatisfaction and grief; No action of Respondent No.2 is responsible for the same.(Clarification to Para No.2). (f) Examination of Physical Documents & Findings by Respondent No.2: The Respondent No.2 has examined the Physical documents and findings on working of the Petitioner's are as under: i. The Petitioner is based at Thaltej, Ahmedabad. ii. The Petitioner has Specialized in Building construction work; done some work in Road construction work too. iii The Petitioner has Experience in Storm Water Drainage is on Small scale work of NP3 pipe 900mm dia452.50Rmt... Cost Rs.11,31,250/in resurfacing work of Shahera Taluka, PMS.... (Clarification of the 'never examined para no.2) I say that looking to the Experience given in the physical documents of thePetitioner at (d) above, it is very short of criteria for experience and preferencein selection of a Contractor. I say that other 4 Bidders have similar experience in Storm Water Drain and their physical documents are in place. (Clarification of the 'never examined para no.2) I say that looking to the Experience given in the physical documents of thePetitioner at (d) above, it is very short of criteria for experience and preferencein selection of a Contractor. I say that other 4 Bidders have similar experience in Storm Water Drain and their physical documents are in place. I say that in this backdrop of scenario (a) to (f), the Preliminary Screening stands at: * The other 4 Bidders have technically qualifying Physical documents in place and * The Petitioner has no qualifying Experience and not enough physical PreQualification data. If it is tried to open the soft copy of the Technical Bid of etender, it can be termed as/into (i) masking the errant behavior of the Petitioner and (ii) giving undue chance, benefit to the Petitioner against 4 other qualifying Bidders (which we can't). The allegations of this sort may set in/rife from 4 other Bidders..... Ergo, it was stopped to go through bulky documents in Soft Copy and search for qualifying criteria of the Petitioner on our own. (Clarification of 'never examined 700 pages in soft copy para no.3.3)” 6. There is no satisfactory reply at the end of the writ applicant to what has been averred in the affidavitinreply referred to above. It appears that the writ applicant does not possess the requisite criteria of experience and at the same time it has been fairly conceded that the prequalification documents and formats were to be submitted in both, (1) soft copy on the web portal as well as (2) physical copy with all prequalification documents at the office of the respondent No.2 between 3.2.2021 and 6.2.2021 after 17 hours. It is not in dispute that the writ applicant failed to submit the prequalification documents and formats in the physical form. 7. It is also brought to our notice that the bids have been finalized and one M/s. Apex Constructions has been assigned the work of contract. In the overall view of the matter, we are convinced that no case is made out for interference. In the result, this writ application fails and is hereby rejected. Notice is discharged.