R. Banumathi, Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

Challenging interim order dated 05.03.2014 granting “status quo” in W.P.(C) No. 526 of 2014 and W.P.(C) No. 533 of 2014, the appellant BCCL has filed these Letters Patent Appeals.

2. In both cases, Shri M.L. Verma, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Indrajit Sinha and Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Advocates, advanced arguments on behalf of the appellant. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate, represented the respondents in L.P.A. No. 160 of 2014 and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate, made submissions on behalf of the respondents in L.P.A. No. 159 of 2014. On 21.04.2014, the matter was listed for admission, when the learned counsel for the parties submitted that since the Writ Petitions are listed on 23.04.2014, they would jointly make a request to the learned Single Judge for taking up the Writ Petitions and therefore, the matter was adjourned for 29.04.2014. On 29.04.2014, the learned counsel appearing for the parties informed the Court that on 23.04.2014, though the matter was listed before the learned Single Judge and order on the applications filed by the parties have been passed, the Writ Petitions could not be heard finally and it has been posted for hearing on 13.05.2014. Mr. M.L. Verma, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, urged that since there is urgency in the matter, the Letters patent Appeals may be finally heard and decided by this Court and therefore, the matter was heard on 30.04.2014 and 01.05.2014.

Facts:

L.P.A. No. 160 of 2014

3. The Writ Petition, W.P.(C) No. 526 of 2014 was filed by Supreme Dev PL (JV) for quashing order dated 27.11.2013 contained in Ref. No. BCCL/CED/GM(C)/Debar3/201314/1264 issued by General Manager (Civil), Bharat Coking Coal Limited in so far as, it covers the writ petitioner which is a Joint Venture with M/s Dev Multicom Pvt. Ltd. A further prayer for a direction to the respondents to open the price bid of the tender notice contained in Ref. No. BCCL/CED/TC/NIT37/201314/967 dated 2021.09.2013 and to allow the writ petitioner to participate in the ongoing tenders subject to final outcome of the Writ Petition, has also been made. The firms namely, M/s Supreme Infrastructure India Ltd. and M/s Dev Multicom Pvt. Ltd. claiming themselves to be reputed companies formed a Joint Venture in the name and style of Supreme Dev PL (JV) through a Joint Venture agreement dated 30.10.2013. In response to the tender notice vide Ref. No. BCCL/CED/TC/NIT37/201314/967 dated 2021.09.2013 for an estimated cost of Rs.345,62,82,879.10, which was subsequently revised vide corrigendum dated 02.11.2013 to Rs.349,20,06,739.20 for construction of Multi Storeyed (G+8) B Type, C Type and DType quarters at Jagjiwan Nagar, CCWO Colony, the Respondent Joint Venture submitted its bid. On 15.11.2013, the technical bid of all the participants namely, (i) Indu Infrastructure Ltd. (ii) KCPL Unity JV and, (iii) Supreme Dev PL (JV) were opened and the technical bid of Indu Infrastructure Ltd. was rejected. The other participants namely, KCPL Unity JV and Supreme Dev PL (JV), the respondent herein, were found qualified. However, the price bid of the Respondent Joint Venture was not opened and the single bid of KCPL Unity JV was accepted even though, price quoted by the Respondent Joint Venture is much lower than the price quoted by KCPL Unity JV. Neither any showcause notice was issued nor any opportunity was afforded to the Respondent Joint Venture before taking a decision not to open the price bid of the Respondent Joint Venture. It is stated that the action of the appellant would cause loss of several crores to BCCL and the action of the appellant BCCL is unfair, unjust and arbitrary besides, being actuated with malice in law.

L.P.A. No. 159 of 2014

4. A Joint Venture in the name and style of AT Dev PL (JV) was formed by M/s Avinash Transport and M/s D