1. 1. Both these writ petitions involve common questions of law and facts and therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are heard and decided together taking the facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5119/08 as a leading case.

2. The petitioner Udaipur Tanker Owners Association filed the instant writ petition stating therein that the petitioner Association is a registered Association and carrying on the business of tanker transportation of petroleum products. The respondent Indian Oil Corporation invited tenders for awarding contracts for the road transportation of bulk petroleum products like MS/HSD Branded fuels etc. from the Bulk Oil Storage and handling location in Rajasthan State to locations within the State and outside the State vide Notice Inviting Tender Annex.1. Some of the members of the petitioner association submitted tender forms. The date of opening of the tender forms was scheduled to be 04.08.2008, however, in the meantime the petitioner Association filed writ petition before this Court and by order dated 30.07.2008 opening of the tenders was stayed and therefore, the tenders have not yet been opened. The petitioner association challenges the conditions enumerated in the tender form on the ground that they are discriminatory. According to the petitioner association, the earnest money for tanker owners has been fixed as Rs. 5,000/- whereas for retail outlet dealers the earnest money has been fixed as Rs. 1,000/-. So far as security deposit it concerned, for the tanker owners, a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- has been fixed, whereas for the retail outlet dealers, only Rs. 50,000/- per contract has been fixed towards security deposit irrespective of the number of tank trucks. So also with regard to number of vehicles, the minimum vehicles required for tanker owners are two owned and three others whereas for the retail outlet dealers the minimum vehicles required are one owned and can supply to other dealer as a consortium with other retail outlet dealers. Apart from these discriminatory conditions, according to the petitioner association, the other conditions imposed are that the carrier shall ensure that the truck-tanker is painted and maintained as per the colour scheme advised by the Oil Company from time to time and carrier shall also ensure that the name of Oil Company and Logo is prominently displayed on the tank of Truck-Tanker and the name of the base location in the information panel as per the directions of the Oil Company. The members of the petitioner association have raised objection with regard to such terms and conditions of the notice inviting tender on the ground of being discriminatory, impractical and inconsistent with the Act and the Rules. Hence these writ petitions.

3. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents raising a preliminary objection that the writ of mandamus is not maintainable by an Association, only an individual if aggrieved by any act of the respondents can seek the writ of mandamus. Learned counsel for the respondent Corporation has relied on two decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in (1) Shri Mahinder Kumar Gupta etc. v. Union of India, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, JT 1995 (1) SC 11 and in (2) Federation of Bar Associations in Karnataka v. Union of India (2000) 6 SCC 715 .

4. It has further been stated that the petitioners have concealed the material facts in the writ petition inasmuch as prior to issuance of notice inviting tender (for short 'the NIT' hereinafter), the respondent Corporation had organised pre bid meeting inviting objections and suggestions with regard to the proposed terms and conditions of the NIT and the meetings were held at various locations during the months of April, 2008 and May, 2008 and were attended by various transporters and retail outlet dealers and in those meetings the revised terms of transportation contract which are impugned in the writ petition were also explained and various transpor