JUDGMENT :

1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-

i. the impugned order dated 17.12.2019 (An.5) may kindly be quashed and set aside;

ii. the respondents may be directed to further process bid of the petitioner from the stage of opening of financial bid and to issue the letter of intent to the petitioner to enable it to undertake production;

iii. any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may be passed in favour of the petitioner

v. the writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs throughout.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No 2 Director, Mines and geology, Udaipur issued a Notice Inviting Tender (herein after referred to as NIT for short) dated 03.07.2019 (Annexure-1) for various blocks of Limestone in District, Nagaur, Rajasthan as per which, an applicant was required to have net-worth of Rs 4,03,14,624/-, and since the petitioner was having the net-worth of aforesaid amount therefore, the petitioner company participated in the auction proceedings and submitted the bid and all the necessary documents. The petitioner also deposited bid security in the form of bank guarantee to the tune of Rs 40,31,463, and upon being found eligible, the bid was considered and examined and the petitioner-Company was found technically qualified and, thus, accordingly it was rated as technically qualified bidder as evident from the communication issued by the Director, Mines and Geology Udaipur, dated 19.08.2019 (Annexure-2) for the Block No.13, wherein the name of the petitioner company was shown at item No.8.

3. As per the aforementioned letter (Annexure No.2), the Initial Price Offer (in short I.P.O.) of the above-mentioned blocks was to be opened on 21.08.2019. Thereafter the price offer was opened by the concerned agency and in that process the bid of the petitioner was found to be the highest final price where the petitioner's offer was 25.60% and accordingly a declaration was made on 05.09.2019 and thus, the petitioner was declared as a 'Preferred Bidder' on 05.09.2019 as per declaration dated 05.09.2019 (Annexure 3).

4. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 11 of the Mineral (Auction) Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2015) provides that an amount equal to 0.50% of the value of the estimated resources shall be the upfront payment. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 11 provides that the upfront payment shall be payable to the State Government in three equal installments of 10%, 10% and 80% as specified in the Tender Document and shall be adjusted in full at the earliest against the amount to be paid under sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 on commencement of production of mineral as specified in the Tender Document. The petitioner was called upon to pay the first installment and accordingly had paid which is evident from the communication dated 23.09.2019 (Annexure-4).

5. According to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Rules of 2015 which provides that the Preferred Bidder shall submit the first installment (i.e.10%) of upfront payment as per Rule 11 of the Rules of 2015 and the petitioner has made the payment to the tune of Rs.20,15,732 (Rupees Twenty lacs fifteen thousand seven hundred and thirty two).

6. The petitioner made the payment of the first installment and the financial bid was also found to be correct and the highest, accordingly, the petitioner was declared as a Preferred Bidder. In these circumstances, as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Rules, 2015 the State Government was required to issue a letter of intent (LOI for short) to the petitioner who was adjudged as a Preferred Bidder.

7. However, the State Government issued the office order dated 17.12.2019 (Annex.5) and in view of clause 14.11 of the Tender Document rejected the bid of the petitioner. The rejection was made on the ground that reserve price for the block in question was 25.51% and the offer recei