Honble VERMA, J.–Both the revision petitions have been filed against the order dated 2.9.2000 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Ajmer by which order the order passed by the trial Court on 17.8.2000 on the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC have been reversed holding therein that the plaintiff petitioner was not entitled for any interim order pending the civil suit.

(2). The petitioner plaintiff was one of the applicant applying for tender for construction of Satellite Hospital at Adarsh Nagar, Amer as per the advertisement dated 11.5.2000. The tender forms could be purchased from the office from 10.6.2000 to 24.6.2000 and submitted upto 26.6.2000 when the technical bid was to be opened at 4.00 p.m. It was the requirement of the tender that the applicants were to purchase book-lets containing the details required to be filled up in the shape of two booklets called `Technical bid and the `Financial bid. The Technical bid and the Financial bid booklets contains the instructions in regard to experience and documents to be attached along with the tender. Technical bid was to be opened on 26.6.2000 at 4.00 p.m. and if the technical bid submitted by the applicants were to be found in order, the other part of the bid i.e. Financial bid was to be opened on 3.7.2000. Initially the tender was for the approx. cost of the construction of Rs. 138 lacs with ernest money of Rs. 2.76 lacs. It was mentioned in the advertisement that 0.5% was to be deposited as ernest money by the registered contractors of the Government and the applicants shall be bound by the conditions as mentioned in RPWA 100.

(3). Except the above-said details in the advertisement, no other conditions had been mentioned primarily for the reason the instructions and conditions and documents have been mentioned in the book-lets containing performas called the technical bid and financial bid.

(4). Vide another letter dated 21.6.2000, the estimated cost was increasd to Rs. 145.63 lacs and with proportionate increase of the ernest money. As many as seven forms/government contractors applied in response to the advertisement including the petitioner plaintiff.

(5). As per record, produced, out of seven bidders the technical bid was found to be in order in regard to two bidders only i.e. Ankit Construction and Gyarsi Lal Mohan Lal. Three technical bids were found to be not in order only on the ground that the sales tax clearance certificate had not been attached i.e. the technical bidders of the petitioner Jain Construction, Shyam Lal and Asian Construction.

(6). As per the order impugned, three contractors namely Jain Construction Company, the petitioner, M/s. Sujan Mal Gadia and Mukesh G. Goyal and another had filed the suits challenging the action of the respondents in rejecting their technical bid on the ground that as per the instructions of the booklet and performas issued by the department in regard to Technical bid, there was no requirement what-so-ever to attach the clearance certificate of Income tax or Sales tax and the documents as mentioned in the book-let of technical bid had been rightly submitted. It was the case of the plaintiff petitioner that if at all the income tax clearance certificate and sales tax clearance certificates are required to be filed, those could be attached only with the book- let of Financial bid which financial bid was to be opened on a subsequent date of opening of the technical bid.

(7). Along with the suit, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. was also filed. The trial court after going through the various submissions made by the parties had granted the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC with a direction that the petitioner and other plaintiffs in other suits be considered in opening the Financial bid of the plaintiffs. For the reasons that the Technical bid was rejected, therefore, the department had not thought it proper or fit to open the Financial bid of the plaintiffs as as per the department

Click Here to Read the rest of this document