By the Court.—These two writ petitions have been filed relating to the supply of textbooks to be distributed free of cost to the students of Basic Schools (Class I to VIII) recognized by the Basic Education Department, State of U.P. and aided by the Government. The supply is under a National Policy for which the State Government has to take a decision for every educational session and in order to ensure such supply and the award of contract for the same, the State Government has been laying down the policy of the quality of the paper to be utilized for the cover pages and the internal pages for printing of such textbooks. This petition is only in respect of the use of the quality of paper for printing the internal pages.

2. The challenge is to the alteration in the said policy for the current year supply of textbooks in 2016-17 under the Government Order dated 17.2.2016 and the consequential tender notice together with the proceedings that have been undertaken therein dated 17.4.2016.

3. The policy dated 17.2.2016 has been prayed for being quashed in Writ Petition No. 5443 (MB) of 2016 and the same policy has been challenged by way of an amendment in Writ Petition No. 8499 (MB) of 2016, which in addition has also challenged the tender notice dated 17.4.2016. Both these writ petitions, even though filed by two separate petitioners, the former being a manufacturer and supplier of eco-friendly paper and the latter by two printers and publishers of the textbooks claiming themselves to be entitled to participate in the tender bid, have therefore been heard together.

4. Four sets of intervenors have also filed applications for intervention, two in Writ Petition No. 5443 (MB) of 2016, namely, M/s. Shreyans Industries Limited and M/s. Satia Industries Limited both of whom are manufacturers of paper claiming that they are manufacturers of virgin pulp paper. Two applications have been filed by M/s. Singhal Agencies, a registered Partnership Firm, involved in the business of printing and publishing and the fourth application is on behalf of M/s. Burda Druck India Private Limited also a printer and publisher. The intervention applications have been filed by all in Writ Petition No. 8944 (MB) of 2016 and by M/s. Singhal Agencies alone in Writ Petition No. 5443 (MB) of 2016. The intervenors are opposing the stand taken by the petitioners alongwith the State Government. The State Government has filed a counter-affidavit and a supplementary counter-affidavit in Writ Petition No. 8944 (MB) of 2016 supporting the policy dated 17.2.2016 as well as the terms and conditions of the tender notice dated 17.4.2016 that are under challenge.

5. Writ Petition No. 5443 (MB) of 2016 filed by M/s. Fibremarx Papers Pvt. Ltd. and another was entertained earlier and the following interim order was passed on 17.3.2016 :

“Heard Sri Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Shishir Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri H. P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Sri J. P. Mathur, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5.

Sri Anupam Mehrtora has filed an impleadment application on behalf of M/s. Singhal Agencies, which has been entertained under Chapter XXII Rule 5-A of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.

This petition was taken up on 15th March, 2016 when the following order was passed :

“Hon’ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.

Hon’ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.

The submission raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the utilization of paper which has now been altered under the new policy is contrary to the notification dated 9.11.1992 issued by the Union Government of India and is also in the teeth of Bureau of Indian Standards Specification No. 1848 (4th Revision) which in clause 4.8.2 defines the specific requirements and which excludes utilization of virgin pulp of bamboo and hardwood. It is, therefore, submitted that the policy adopted by the respondent-State invitin