SARDAR ALI KHAN, J.

( 1 ) THESE two writ petitions, viz. , W. P. No. 18326/88 and W. P. No. 18484/88, raise common questions of fact and law and are apt to be disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) W. P. No. 18484/88 is filed for issue of a writ of mandamus declaring the negotiations dt. 3-12-1988 between the 1st respondent and the 5th respondent in regard to the Sandc 13 (14)/88 Cont. I of Cherlapally, as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently to declare the re-commendation of the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent recommending acceptance of the tender of the 5th respondent as illegal.

( 3 ) THE other Writ Petition, W. P. 18326/88, is filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus declaring the negotiations between respondent 3 and respondent 2 dt. 3-12-1988 in respect of SD. Cl. 13 (14)/88 Handt Contract, Cherlapally, and consequent recommendations of the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent for accepting the tender of the 3rd respondent as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.

( 4 ) EVEN from a reading of the prayers mentioned above, it is clear that the subject matter of both the writ petitions is one and the same as indeed are the facts governing the case

Click Here to Read the rest of this document