The court affirms the need for due process in tender evaluation and directs consideration of pending representations in light of procedural compliance.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the awarding of work, as per Ext.P1 tender notification to the 3rd respondent herein. Petitioner was one of the participants in the tender process initiated as per Ext.P1. The contention raised by the petitioner is that, the 3^rd respondent failed to comply with the conditions of pre - qualification, as he did not submit duly filled and signed copy of requisition for e- payment as per item No.6 Part-VI of the bid. It is also pointed out that, on similar reasons, the petitioner was earlier disqualified by the respondent. Now over-looking the said defect, the tender submitted by the 3^rd respondent is accepted and he happened to be the successful bidder.

2. In such circumstances, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 representation highlighting the aforesaid aspect, which is now pending before the 2^nd respondent. Limited relief sought by the petitioner is to direct the 2^nd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P9.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to the 3^rd respondent, in view of the nature of the order that I proposed to pass.

Accordingly, it is ordered that, the 2^nd respondent shall take up Ext.P9 and appropriate orders thereon shall be passed after hearing the 3^rd respondent and the tenderer who is L2 and other affected parties. This shall be done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.