BIRENDRA KUMAR
Khushee Construction through its Power of Attorney Holder, namely Shree Rajeev Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Since both the writ applications, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have been brought by the same petitioner raising same questions of law to be adjudicated and the respondents have defended the impugned orders on common grounds, hence, both have been heard together and are being disposed off by this common judgment.
Facts of CWJC No.3963 of 2020.
2. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Govt. contract, registered as Class-I contractor. Respondent No.8, the Executive Engineer, PHED, Saharsa Division floated tenders on 15.06.2019. The technical bids of tenders were opened on 16.08.2019 and financial bid in July-August, 2019. Since the petitioner was the lowest bidder, its bid was accepted by the respondent No.8 and work order was issued in favour of the petitioner in between 19.09.2019 to 18.12.2019 for execution of different contracts, total 118 signed between the parties. A list of contract between the parties are at Annexure-4 series.
3. The petitioner had submitted earnest money in the form of certificate of deposits in the post-office which was adjusted against the 2% performance security submitted at the time of agreements. In pur
Commissioner of Police, Bombay Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji
Mohinder Singh Gill and Anr. Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Ors.
Commissioner of Police, Bombay Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji
Mohinder Singh Gill and Anr. Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Ors.
Manuelsons Hotels Private Limited Vs. State of Kerala & Ors
Shri Krishan Vs. Kurukshetra University, reported in AIR 1976 SC 376
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.