Aftab Alam, J.

1. The dispute in this case relates to the grant of transportation and handling contract by the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) for the year 2003-2004 for the district of Chapra.

2. On 12-1-2003 the Corporation issued a notice inviting tenders for appointment of Transporting and Handling Agents in a number of districts in the States of Bihar and Jharkhand. In response to the notice five tenders were submitted in the district of Chapra. The petitioner and respondent No. 6 were among the five tenderers. As per rules the tenders were first examined by the District Transport Committee, headed by the District Magistrate. The District Transport Committee found that three tenders did not satisfy the terms and conditions of the tender notice and consequently those tenders were rejected. In its meeting held on 6-5-1983 the District Transport Committee decided to forward the tenders submitted by the petitioner and respondent No. 6 (in that order) to the Corporations Headquarter at Patna for further action. It is alleged by the petitioner that in the Corporations Headquarter respondent No. 6 alone was called for negotiation and finally the contract was given to him disregarding the lower rates quoted by the petitioner.

3. On notice being issued, counter affidavits were filed both by the Corporation and respondent No. 6. At the time of hearing Mr. J.P. Shukla, Sr. Advocate appearing for the Corporation also produced the original record for the perusal of the Court.

4. On the basis of the materials on record Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, Sr. Advocate stated that the following facts are beyond dispute Different transportation rates are given, depending upon the distance, e.g., upto 10 Kms, upto 20 Kms, upto 50 Kms, upto 100 Kms and over 100 Kms. And then an over-all average rate is worked out. The over-all average rate approved by the Corporation for the current year was Re 1.29. On the basis of the rates quoted by the petitioner the District Transport Committee worked out his over-all average rate at Re 1.23 (According to Mr. Dwivedi, there was an error in the calculation made by the Committee and on the rates given by the petitioner the over-all average would be Re 1.08). On the rates quoted by respondent No. 6, his over all average came to Re 1.50. But later, on the basis of negotiation with the Corporation he lowered down his over-all average rate to Re 1.40 (being still higher them the rate approved by the Corporation) and on this rate the contract was given to him.

5. Mr. Dwivedi further submitted that for the previous year the Corporation had paid Rs. 15,62,200 for the transportation contract; on the petitioners rates the total payment would come to Rs. 15,52,329 and on the rates on which the contract was given to respondent No. 6 the total payment would come to Rs. 17,91,447.

6. These statements made by Mr. Dwivedi were not controverted either by Mr. Shukla or by Mr. K.N. Chaubey, Sr. Advocate, appearing for respondent No. 6.

7. On behalf of the Corporation it was stated that the contract was not given to the petitioner because his papers were incomplete. He had not submitted (i) his permanent address duly verified by the District Magistrate of his home district and (ii) a description of his movable and immovable properties duly verified by the Sub-divisional Officer.

8. Clause 5 of the notice inviting tender reads as follows:-

-

"5. NIVIDADATAON KO NIVIDA KE SAATH SAMBANDHIT--ZILA PADADHIKARI/UPAYUKTA DAWARA NIRGAT CHARITRA PRAMAN PATRA DENA ANIWARYA HAI. CHARITRA PRAMAN PATRA PRAKASHAN KI TITHI KE 6 (CHEM) MAAH PURWA KI AWADHI KA NAHI HONA CHAHIYE. SAATH HI NIVIDADATAON KO AAPNE GRIH ZILA KE ZILA PADADHIKARI/UPAYUKTA SE SATYAPIT AAPANA ASTHAI PATA EWAM ANUMANDLADHIKARI SE CHAL ACHAL SAMPATI KI VIVARNI SANLANGAN KARNI HOGI."

9. The aforequoted provision demands a character certificate from the concerned District Magistrate, issued not before a