ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-company with the following prayers :-

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed to your lordships may kindly graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and :

i) by appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the impugned order dated 13.4.2023 issued by the respondent No.4 may kindly be quashed and set aside and restrained the respondent No.5 from dropping/cancelling the present Tender.

ii) by appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to award work to the petitioner pursuant to TN-538 dated 15.11.2022 and TNTW-654 dated 15.11.2022 respectively looking to H1 bidder to the petitioner company.

iii) Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents initiated e-tender process for “Consultancy services for assisting and supporting in Project Management under Revamped Reforms-Linked Results-based Distribution Sector Scheme” for three companies namely Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (JVVNL), Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (AVVNL) and Jodhpur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (JdVVNL) and the petitioner is concerned with the JVVNL. In this writ petition, the petitioner seems to be basically aggrieved by the condition incorporated in Clause-4-Bid Capacity provided in the instructions ‘Qualification Requirements for Consultants’ to be followed by the bidders participating in the tender process and the order dated 13.04.2023, which the petitioner has challenged in the present writ petition, appears to be based thereon, issued by the respondents whereby the aforesaid PMA tender for Jaipur Discom has been dropped.

3. The Clause No.4 being relevant to appreciate the controversy raised herein, is quoted as under :

4. The impugned order dated 13.04.2023 which has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition, is related to the NIT issued by the respondents on 15.11.2022, pursuant to which the petitioner had applied and submitted its tender with the respondents on 13.12.2022 and thereafter the technical bid was opened by the respondents on 14.12.2022, including that of the petitioner and the communication dated 03.01.2023 reveals that the petitioner was declared technically qualified and by the communication dated 04.01.2023, which discloses about opening up of fiscal bids, the petitioner was declared as L-1. The respondents vide their communication dated 19.01.2023 informed the petitioner about the negotiations being held on 20.01.2023 in which the petitioner-company participated and from the communication dated 23.01.2023 it is transpired that the petitioner accepted the counter offer and informed the respondents in this regard accordingly. Thereafter, the respondents, according to the petitioner, without assigning any reason, cancelled the aforesaid tender process vide their order dated 13.04.2023, which is under challenge herein, as observed above.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondents in cancelling the tender process clearly shows their non-application of mind. He further submitted that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner prior to passing of the order dated 13.04.2023. He further submitted that the action of the respondents in cancelling the tender process is also in violation of the provision