JUDGMENT

CYRIAC JOSEPH, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment dated 7.7.2009 rendered by a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in C.W.P. No. 2266 of 2009, allowing the said writ petition. The appellants were the respondents in the writ petition and the sole respondent herein was the petitioner therein.3. Facts in brief are stated hereunder:On 18.9.2008, the appellant State of Haryana invited tenders from interested persons for appointment as Entrepreneur/Agent for collection of toll at Toll Bridge over river Yamuna on Karnal-2Meerut Road, near U.P. Border. The respondent M/s. Malik Traders was one of the 13 bidders who submitted tenders. As required by the terms and conditions of the Bid, all the bidders, including the respondent, deposited the Bid Security of 20 lakhs in the form of bank guarantee or FDR in favour of the Executive Engineer. M/s. Gaurav Traders who quoted 8,83,30,000/- was the highest bidder and the respondent M/s. Malik Traders who quoted 7,97,66,180/- was the second highest bidder.4. As required under the terms and conditions of the bid, the respondent in paragraph 8 of its written offer/bid agreed to keep the bid open for acceptance upto 90 days after the last date of receipt of bid. The respondent also agreed that it shall be bound by the communication of acceptance of the bid dispatched within the aforesaid period of 90 days. In paragraph 10 of the offer/bid, the respondent also agreed that the full value of Bid Security would be forfeited without prejudice to any other right or remedy available to the Executive Engineer or his successor in office or his representative, should the respondent withdraw or modify its bid/offer after the last date and time for the receipt of bids, during the period of bid validity (90 days) or extended validity period.35. Since M/s. Gaurav Traders was found to be the highest bidder, a letter of acceptance was issued to it on 25.9.2008. However, it failed to deposit the security amount and the first instalment as per the letter of acceptance. Therefore, as per condition No. 9.3(B) of the Detailed Notice Inviting Tender (DNIT) and condition No. 6 of the acceptance letter, the Bid Security of 20 lakhs deposited by M/s. Gaurav Traders was forfeited and the letter of acceptance was cancelled and withdrawn vide letter dated 16.10.2008 of the competent authority. Thereafter, a letter of acceptance dated 26.11.2008 was issued to the respondent M/s. Malik Traders who was the second highest bidder. As per condition No. 6 of the said letter of acceptance, the respondent was required to deposit the security amount and the first instalment within 21 days from the receipt of the letter of acceptance. However, the respondent failed to deposit the security amount and the first instalment as required by the letter of acceptance. Hence, vide Memo No. 5029 dated 17.12.2008 issued by the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division No. III, PWD, B&R Branch, Karnal, the letter of acceptance was cancelled and withdrawn and the Bid Security of 20 lakhs was forfeited.46. It has to be mentioned that before receipt of the letter of acceptance, the respondent had sent a letter dated 15.11.2008 informing the Executive Engineer that the respondent was not interested in the work and, therefore, the amount of Bid Security deposited on 19.9.2008 may be refunded. However, the appellants did not consider or act upon the said letter dated 15.11.2008 of the respondent, as the respondent had agreed to keep its bid open for acceptance upto 90 days after the last date of receipt of bid and the said period of 90 days had not expired. In this connection, it has also to be mentioned that the letter of acceptance dated 26.11.2008 was issued to the respondent before the expiry of the above-mentioned period of 90 days.7. After cancellation of the letter of acceptance issued to the respondent and after expiry of the above-mentioned period of 90 days on 17.12.2008, the Executive Engine