The tender process violated the Uttarakhand Procurement Rules, leading to its invalidation and disposal of the writ petition as infructuous due to the Zila Panchayat's lack of authority to collect the service fee.

JUDGMENT :

MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, CJ.

1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs :

“(a) Issue writ or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the tender process as initiated by respondent No. 3 vide Notification dated 23.12.2023 (contained as Annexure No. 2 to this writ petition).

(b) Issue writ or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the Contract dated 10.01.2024, executed by respondent No. 3 in favour of respondent No. 4 (contained as Annexure No. 5 to this writ petition.

(c) Issue writ or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 to conduct an Enquiry against the respondent No. 3 as by issuing Tender Notification dated 23.12.2023 the Procurement Rules, 2017 have been violated which are mandatory and, thus resulted in revenue loss to respondent No. 3.”

2. The Zila Panchayat, Pauri Garhwal (respondent No. 3 herein) issued impugned advertisement dated 23.12.2023 inviting tenders for collection of administration fee at Garudchatti, District Pauri Garhwal, for three years. The bids were opened on 04.01.2024 as per the date notified in the advertisement and respondent No. 4 was declared successful, his bid being the highest for Rs.55,01,250/-. The petitioner did not participate in the tender process. However, he filed the present writ petition on the ground that the tender process adopted by the respondent Zila Panchayat was in violation of the UTTARAKHAND PROCUREMENT RULES , 2017. One of the pleas was that Rule 35 thereof had been violated. The said Rule prescribes that for procurement of materials and services costing more than Rs. 2.5 lakhs the invitation of bids should be by electronic mode. However, the respondents have invited the tenders by publication of notice in newspapers in violation of Rule 35 . The other plea was that Rule 10 was also violated as the notice was not published in two widely circulated national newspapers and the minimum time for submitting the tender should have been two weeks whereas only 12 days time was given. A co-ordinate bench while entertaining the writ petition by order dated 13.05.2025 directed Superintendent of Police (CBCID), District Pauri Garhwal to investigate as to whether the procurement rules have been followed by the respondent Zila Panchayat in letter and spirit.

3. In compliance of the said order it seems that inquiry was conducted by CBCID, and the report is on record. The conclusions recorded by the Inquiry Officer in his report are as follows :

“Despite the minimum bid amount being Rs.49.95 lakh, the District Panchayat Pauri did not adopt the e-procurement process for the Garudchatti service fee collection tender, thereby violating Rule 35 of the UTTARAKHAND PROCUREMENT RULES , 2017. Furthermore, only 12 days were given from the date of advertisement to the last date for submission of tender forms, whereas, as pr rules, a minimum of two weeks’ time should have been provided. Hence, Rule 10(5) of the UTTARAKHAND PROCUREMENT RULES , 2017 was also not followed.

Therefore, the tender process adopted by the District Panchayat Pauri for the Garudchatti service fee collection tender, on the basis of which the tender was awarded to Shri Ranveer Singh, did not fully comply with the provisions of the UTTARAKHAND PROCUREMENT RULES , 2017.”

4. On 24.07.2025, this Court directed respondent No. 3 to intimate respondent No. 4 by written notice about the pendency of the writ petition and the next date fixed for hearing.

5. On 04.08.2025, the matter was again taken up by a co-ordinate bench. On the said date there was no representation on behalf of respondent No. 4. The Court after r