JUDGMENT :

1. Both these Petitions involve similar questions of facts and the law and are, thus, for the sake of convenience, decided by this common Judgment. For purpose of reference, the facts of WP(C) No. 693/2021 are relied upon.

2. The case of the Petitioner is that it had submitted the tender documents for the works with respect to which tenders were invited by the official Respondents in terms of E-Tender notices dated 28th of November, 2020; 8th of December, 2020; and 19th of December, 2020, strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the tender notices. Thereafter, the official Respondents, as stated, entertained the tender documents of the Petitioner-firm and, after opening of the tender documents, found the Petitioner-firm to be the lowest bidder. However, instead of issuing allotment orders in favour of the Petitioner-firm, the official Respondents, in terms of communications/ notices dated 21st of January, 2021, informed the Petitioner-firm that before allotment order is issued in its favour, it is required to deposit additional security at 5% and 4% of the advertised cost in the shape of CDR/FDR/BG pledged to the Assistant Controller, Estates, as per the ter