1. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This intra-Court appeal arises out of the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 13.02.2013, by which he has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that there was sufficient compliance of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as an opportunity was given to the appellants, who were the petitioners before learned Single Judge, before passing the impugned order, by which the Bid/Proposal, submitted by the petitioners for selection of an Independent Engineer for Jaipur Rind Road Project, was rejected; the agency was debarred for six months from participating in the Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur(JDA), and the bid security of the agency submitted along with the Bid/Proposal, was forfeited.

3. Brief facts, giving rise to this Special Appeal, are that the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Government of India, decided for six laning of Jaipur Ring Road from Ajmer Road to Agra Road section on Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Transfer(DBFOT) Toll basis. The project for a length of approximately 47 kms., is estimated with project cost of Rs.890 crores, and assignment period of 30 months. The JDA was appointed as the Nodal Agency for the execution of the Project.

4. The JDA issued a Request for Proposal(RFP) inviting proposals for engaging an Independent Engineer(IE) Firm in July, 2011, on the basis of the International Competitive Bidding. The petitioner-Company filed their bid, which could not be finalized. The JDA issued a revised tender, vide Request for Proposal on 28.11.2011, with last extended date for submission of the bids, to be 09.01.2012.

5. The petitioner-Company formed a Joint Venture with M/s Nicholas O' Dwyer, vide an agreement dated 07.01.2012, in which the petitioner-Company was designated as Lead Member of the J.V., and a Power of Attorney was executed in favour of one Shri Saurav Shekhar, to do all the necessary acts for submission of the bid. One of the employees of the petitioner-Company was required to submit the same to the Office of the JDA. The JV Company filed its bid along with all supporting documents on 09.01.2012, with requisite Bank Guarantee of Rs.35,60,000/-, as per the provisions of Clause 1.12 of the Request for Proposal, valid upto 06.07.2012.

6. It is submitted that after filing of the bid, the staff members of the petitioner-Company received some unknown calls, inquiring about their consent and other details. The petitioner-Company sent a letter to the Superintending Engineer, Ring Road Project, JDA on 07.06.2012, apprising him of the facts, and further intimation of apprehension regarding one Shri Nitin Jain, who was earlier the General Manager of the National Highways Authority of India(NHAI), and was terminated from the service on the charges of corruption. The petitioner-Company made a complaint that Shri Nitin Jain was trying to influence the tender process. The respondents however maintained silence on the complaint of the petitioner, and did not take any steps. The validity of the bid was to expire on 06.07.2012. The respondents vide communication dated 31.07.2012, requested the petitioner-Company to extend the bid period and the bank guarantee, which was extended by the petitioner-Company upto 31.10.2012, vide its letter dated 07.08.2012.

7. On 13.10.2012, the petitioner-Company received a letter dated 11.10.2012 from the respondents, whereby for the first time, it was intimated to the Company that the document i.e. copy of the certificate dated 06.01.2012, issued by the Project Director, PIU, NHAI, Udaipur, submitted by the petitioner, was a forged document, and that the act of the petitioner comes under the 'fraudulent practice'. The petitioner-Company was required to submit its reply within three days. There were three documents, which were enclosed along with the letter dated 11.10.2012, the details of which are as follows:-

“a. Letter (No.2401) dated 14.09.2012 issued by Project Director, NHAI, in reply to