SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(Del) 111

P.K.BAHRI
R. K. ANEJA – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.Behl, ADARSH B.DAYAL, G.S.SISTANI, M.L.BHARGAV, N.S.SISTANI, RAJ GURU DESHMUKH, Rajesh Lakhanpal

( 1 ) IN this petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the award letters (Copies annexures- o , p and q ) by which three contracts have been awarded to respondent No. 5 by respondent 1 and a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4 to call the petitioner for negotiation and if he is found to be lowest after negotiation, the aforesaid three contracts be awarded to the petitioner.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has been registered as Class II Electrical Contractor with respondent 1 since 1969 and in 1972 he was enlisted as Class I Electrical Contractor and according to the petitioner, he had executed various works of respondent 1 to the entire satisfaction of respondent 1. Respondent 1 had invited tenders for the electrification work in the multistoreyed building to be constructed at Bhikaji Camaji Bhawan, R. K. Puram, in September 1984 and the petitioner being found the lowest tenderer Shri N. E. Gandhi, the then Superintending Engineer in charge of the said Circle, had awarded the said contract although Shri S. K. Sinha, respondent No. 4, who was then working as Executive Engineer, was not stated to be interested in awarding the work to the petitioner.

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top