S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

( 1 ) RULE issued. With consent of parties, the matters have been finally heard.

( 2 ) THESE petitions under Article 226 raise common question of law, hence they were heard and are being disposed by this common judgment.

( 3 ) THE petitioners question conditions spelt out in the "expression of interest for execution of dense carpet works on annual rate basis" (hereafter called "the impugned policy"within jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ("mcd") for 2004-05. The impugned policy was published on 20th may, 2004. It is attacked on ground of arbitrariness and unreasonableness and that the MCD is estopped, by its previous conduct from insisting upon the eligibility criteria framed in the policy.

( 4 ) ALL petitioners are registered contractors with the MCD who claim to have worked for MCD over several years, and successfully executed several dense carpeting contracts (i. e. works in relation to roads and bridges involved in Bituminous Macadam, Asphaltic, etc.) The petitioners aver that as per the prevailing practice in the MCD, contractors are registered in separate categories for specific durations and are permitted to bid/tender for different kind

Click Here to Read the rest of this document