P.K. Musahary, J.

1. The facts leading to filing this writ petition are that the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Laaying-Yangte (Sangram), published a notice inviting tender (NIT in short) on behalf of Governor of Arunachal Pradesh from eligible contractors, Joint Venture firms registered with CPWD/PWD/NBCC/NEEPCO/NHPC/BRO Agencies through Press Notice No. KK (RWD) PMGSY (PH-VII) NIT-01/2008-09 dated 28.11.2008 which was published/advertised in the local daily "Arunachal Times" dated 30.11.2008 followed by Corrigendum No. KK(RWD)/PMGSY(PH-VII)NlT-01/08-09dated9.12.2008, in respect of estimated cost of Construction and Maintenance and Earnest Money. Pursuant to aforesaid NIT and corrigendum, the petitioner along with other firms purchased necessary Bid Document in respect of Package No. 2 (BRTF Kuru Bridge pt. to Pari Village-stage-I) AR/14/03/026, estimated cost of Construction and Maintenance Rs. 1458.83 lakh by paying the required fee of Rs. 15,000/- and having filled the necessary requirements in the documents submitted Tender form/Bids for the packages aforesaid by depositing the earnest money of Rs. 29.17 lakh. The Technical Bid was opened on 18.12.2008 as per the said notice but the Financial Bid, which was supposed to be opened on 22.12.2008, was deferred to 27.12.2008 and finally it was opened on 7.1.2009. When the Financial Bid was finally opened on 7.1.2009, the firm M/s Muzibur Rohman (private respondent No. 6) was accepted as the successful bidder being lowest bidder with a difference of 0.25% from the bid amount offered by the petitioner. However, it was found later on that the Solvency Certificate which is an essential prerequisite under the Standard Bidding Document for PMGSY for Construction and Maintenance, and Guidelines issued by National Rural Roads Development Agency (an Agency of the Ministry of Rural Development), Government of India (hereinafter shall be referred to as Guidelines) was allegedly obtained by illegal/fraud means by the private respondent from State Bank of India, Nirjuli Branch in clear violation of Section 2 Instruction to Bidders (ITB in short), Clause 4.4(B)(a)(iii) of the Appendix to ITB, inasmuch as Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Nirjuli Branch himself issued certificate to the effect that the Solvency Certificate issued earlier in favour of the respondent firm M/s. Muzibur Rohman having Account No. 30605975615 was issued through oversight and the said firm did not put through sufficient transaction to the account to become eligible for such Solvency certificate and as such the said Solvency certificate issued by them on 15.12.2008 in his favour stood cancelled with immediate effect.

2. The petitioner contended that when the matter was brought to the notice of the official respondents about the same they feigned ignorance and refused to take any action on the ground that the petitioner did not bring the said fact to the notice of the respondents earlier and tender has already been settled with the private respondent and the same cannot be recalled causing irreparable loss to the respondent firm. This petition was filed on 24.3.2009 with a prayer:

for setting aside and quashing Tender Package No. 2 (BRTF Kuru Bridge pt. to Pari Village-stage-I) AR/14/03/026, Estimated cost of Construction and Maintenance Rs. 1458.83 lakh settled/awarded in favour of the private respondent and further directing the respondents to settle/award the said Tender Package in favour of the petitioner.

and in the interim "to direct the respondent not to issue any letter of acceptance and notice to proceed work to the private respondent".

3. On 30.3.2009 this Court issued Rule returnable by 6 (six) weeks and also called for the records. On 18.5.2009 this Court also passed an interim order as under:

Having regard to the fact that financial solvency of a tenderer is a vital criteria for considering any bid to be a valid bid and since the Bank which had issued the certificate in favour of the