JUDGMENT :

Javed Iqbal Wani, J.

The petitioner in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution implores for the following reliefs:-

(a) Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing/setting aside the decision of Respondent No. 1 of awarding the contract to Respondent No. 3 pursuant to Notice inviting tender No. NIT/JKMSCL/MACH2019/35 dated 19.08.2019;

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No. 1 to consider the Petitioner’s bid and forthwith award the contract to the petitioner.

(c) Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby restraining Respondent No. 1 from placing orders upon respondent No. 3:

(d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing respondent No. 1 to forthwith withdraw the purchase orders/rate contracts (if any) issued to respondent. 3.

(e) Award the costs of the present petition in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent.

(f) Pass ad interim ex-parte order in terms of prayers (a) to (e) made hereinabove; and

(g) grant such other or further reliefs in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents as this Hon’ court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The reliefs aforesaid are being sought on the facts detailed out in the petition and in brief spelt out hereunder: -

Facts :-

• It is stated by the petitioner that initially a notice inviting tender (NIT) dated 10.07.2019 followed by NIT dated 19.08.2019 are issued by respondent No. 1 for procuring Low-Temperature Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma Sterilizer.

• The petitioner is stated to have submitted its bid in response to the NIT as on 01.10.2019. Respondent No. 1 is stated to have accepted only two bids one that of the petitioner and another of respondent No. 3 herein as per the bidder list available on website of respondent No. 1 as on 01.10.2019.

• It is being further stated that respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 01.11.2019 shortlisted the petitioner for further evaluation by the panel of technical experts requesting the petitioner to give a power point presentation on 06.11.2019 with respect to the products to be supplied by the petitioner, in response whereof a detailed presentation is stated to have been given by the petitioner besides submitting documents sought in the letter dated 01.11.2019.

• It is being next stated that Respondent No. 1 opened the price bid on 12.12.2019 while declaring the petitioner as L-1 with details of price bid available on website of respondent No. 1 as per Bill of Quantities (BOQ).

• It is being further stated that apart from providing bid amounts, a quote was required to be provided by the bidders for consumables and accessories of BOQ-2. The petitioner is stated to have provided the said quotations of Rs. 17,72,702/- (fixed amount for the next five years) whereas, the respondent No. 3 is stated to have not provided the said quotation.

• It is being next stated that subsequent to the opening of the price bid and declaration of the petitioner as L-1 therein, the petitioner came to know that the respondent No. 1 has negotiated the prices of consumables and accessories with respondent No. 3 wherein respondent No. 3 had agreed to provide the said consumables and accessories free of cost. No such negotiation is stated to have been entered into by respondent No. 1 with the petitioner.

• It is being further stated that consequent to the aforesaid negotiations between the respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 1, the respondent No. 1 had added the quotation of consumables and accessories to the total price bid of the petitioner and no such amount had been added to the price bid of respondent No. 3, as a result whereof the respondent No. 1 is stated to have wrongfully and arbitrarily started considering the bid of the petitioner higher than that of the bid of respondent No. 3. A