( 1 ) THIS Judgment will dispose of two writ petitions being C. W. P. No. l706/96 (VXL Engineers Ltd. v. Department of Telecommunications and others) and CWP No. 3013/96 (P. S. Measuremeats and Controls and another v. Deptt. of Telecommunications and others) as these petitions raise common questions. The Petitioners in CWP No. 3013/96 earlier approached the Karnataka High Court jbut the petition was peitted to be allowed to withdrawn with liberty to approach an appropriate Court having jurisdiction. Therefore, this petition was filed in this Court.

( 2 ) THE petitioner company (C. W. 1706/96) is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of Tele Communication Equipments and is alleged to be a major supplier of the said products to respondent No. I as also to the Defence Services. Petitioner No. 1 in C. W. P. 3013/96 is a proprietory concern and. petitioner No. 2 is a private limited company and the petition is filed by one of its shareholders. The said petitioners are manufacturers of Telecom equipments. The petitioners are challenging the acts of respondents 1 and 2 in awarding to respondents 3 to 7 90 per cent of the contract for supply of transmission instruments viz. Digital Transmission Analysers (DTA)34 Mb/s and 140-MB/s without Jitter against tender No. 14-14/94-MMT (OF) and placing advance purchase orders on the said respondents in preference to the petitioners who are equally qualified in all respects and were duly certified as such to supply the said equipments and at rates substantially lower to the rates quoted by respondent Nos. 3 to 7. Respondent No. 1 had called for two tenders each bearing No. 14-11/94-MMT (L) and 14-14/94-MMT (OF ). Both these tenders were invited for supply of transmission instruments viz DTA 140- Mb/s without Jitter and DTA 34-MB/s- without Jitter. The following factual averments as made in paragraphs 4 and 5 of CWP No. 1706/96 may be reproduced as follows:

"4. Against Tender No. 14-14/94-MMT (OF), for supply Optical Fibre Test Instruments, the petitioner vide its letter dated April 28, 1995, offered to supply to respondent No. 1, the following instruments manufactured by the petitioner.

A) Digital Transmission Annalyser Model VE8306 for 704 Kb/s, 2,8 and34 Mb/s without Jitter.

B) Digital Transmission Analyser Model VEB303-34 for 2,8 and 34 Mb/s without Jitter.

C) Digital Transmission Analyser Model VE 8307 for 2, 8,34 and 140 Mb/s without Jitter. .

D) Digital Transmission Analyser Model VE8303-140 for 2,8,34 and 140. Mb/s without Jitter.

E) Distal Transmission Analyser Model VE8300 for 704 Kb/s, 2 and 8 Mb/s without Jitter.

WITH its said letter dated 28th April 1995, the petitioner enclosed its supply records, so as to draw the attention of respondent. No: 1 to the fact that even against previous orders, the petitioner had supplied all the instruments much before the delivery period.

RESPONDENT No. 1 was informed that the petitioner s infrastructure assessment for various Testing Instruments including the DTA s was Completed by Telecom Engineering Centre, New Delhi, vide their Infrastructure Assessment No. 41-23/92-TEC dated 25th September, 1992. Moreover, the instruments mentioned under serial Nos. 2 and 4 of the Bid documents were Type Approved by the Telecommunication Engineering Centre, New Delhi, against various DOT supply orders and the petitioner had supplied large quantities of the said models to respondent No. l, well within the original delivery period. .

RESPONDENT No. 1 was further informed of the material fact that since the Infrastructure Assessment of the petitioner had been completed and the petitioner had supplied large quantities of Test Instruments including DTA s were enough documentary evidence of the fact that the petitioner has the financial, technical and production capability necessary to perform the contract.

WITH its said letter dated 28th April 1995, the petitioner submitted the Bid Form, Bank Gua