( 1 ) THIS petition is directed against the respondents for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision in the matter of issuance of letter of acceptance for award of the work under contract No. ll allegedly already approved by respondent No. l, National High- ways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as the Authority ) in favour of re- spondent No. 4 and for issuance of a writ of mandamus for directing respondents I and 2 to give effect immediately to its own resolution for award of the work under the said contract to the petitioner and for further directions to respondent No. 3 to exercise its powers under Section 33 of the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) to ensure that preference granted to Indian citizens or Companies or Firms is not, in any manner, prejudiced or whittled down at the instance of any foreign body or agency which is detrimental to the interest of the Indian Bidders.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Company duly incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, having its registered office at Bombay and is engaged in the business of Civil Engineering Construction of Roads, Hydroelectric Projects, Nuclear Power Plants, Thermal Power Plants etc. Respondent No. l is National Highway Authority of India which is a statutory Authority, constituted under the Act and is responsible amongst others for construction and improvements of National Highways in the country. Respondent No. 3 is the Ministry of Surface Transport, which is the concerned Ministry having the administrative control over respondent No. l. Respondent No. 4 is a Joint Venture Company constituted for the purpose of bidding for this contract and is having its office at Hyderabad.

( 3 ) THE Government of India, it is alleged in the petition, received a loan of US$ 245 million from Asian Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as adb ) towards the cost of National Highways Projects in the country. The said loan is required to be utilised for the particular purpose only, namely, laying down of the Highways as well as ancillary work connected therewith. After receiving the loan from ADB respondent No. l invited tenders in September, 1995 for five different works relating to construction of Highways at different places in the country. According to the bidding documents the bids were to be submitted by pre-qualified bidders only. The said bids were required to) be submitted by December 16, 1995 which date was subsequently extended to January 5, 1996 and the bids were opened on this date in presence of the bidders.

( 4 ) THE petitioner submitted its bid for works relating to contract Nos. I, II and III.

THE petitioner was pre-qualified bidder as required by respondent No. 1 in biding documents. Except for bids for contract No. 2, all other bids were invited for option A, viz; Bituminous Surface (Flexible pavement) whereas for contract No. II, the invitation was for option B, viz; cement concrete surface (Rigid pavement) or for option A, viz; Bituminous surface or for both. Option B is a more cost-effective option in the instant case. The present petition is regarding the bid submitted by the petitioner relating to contract No. ll for the work of Four Laning and strengthening of existing two lanes from Raniganj (Km. 474. 00) to Panagarh (Km-515. 236) Section of NH-2 in West Bengal. The petitioner further alleges that on March 9, 1996 a special meeting took place of the Board of respondent No. l wherein the said respondent, after considering various evaluated bids, came to the conclusion that the bids submitted by the petitioner company was the lowest evaluated bid. Therefore, in this meeting, the bid of the petitioner was approved. The. copies of the Minutes of this meeting arc filed as Annexure a to the writ petition. The same may be reproduced as hereunder:

"minutes OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY HELD ON 9. 3. 1996 AT 4. 00 P. M. IN CONFERENCE HALL, MAHARANI BAGH, NEW DELHI.

CHAIRM