ORDER :

SUDHIR SINGH, J.

Heard the parties.

2. Following is the relief sought for in the present writ application:-

“I. For quashing the letter dated 15.09.2025 issued by the Tender Committee constituted under the Chairmanship of Respondent No.-3, communicated vide E-letter dated 16.09.2025 by the Respondent No.-5, as contained in Annexure- P:7 by which the Petitioner who was duly selected in financial bid being L-1 against NIT No- RRSMP/10/25-25, Package No- RRSMP/25-26 (Tender ID 143239) has been cancelled and order for re-tender has been made.

II. For commanding the Respondents to continue the contract and issue work order in favour of the Petitioner as he has been duly selected being L-1 for the execution of the said contract work.

III. For issuance of such other appropriate order or direction which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. The brief facts of the present case are that an e-tender bearing No. RRSMP-10/2025-26 was invited under the signature of the Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary on 03.07.2025 for execution of works under the Rural Road Strengthening and Management Program (RRSMP), which was uploaded on the departmental portal on 05.07.2025. The last date for submission of bids was initially fixed as 01.08.2025 and was subsequently extended to 08.08.2025. The petitioner, being eligible, participated in the tender process for Package No. RRSMP/25- 26 (Tender ID 143239), Arwal-2. During the technical evaluation, one of the bidders, namely Praveen Kumar (ID No. 624777), was declared disqualified on account of non-submission of payment certificate and Form 26AS as required for verification of Annual Turnover under the bid conditions. Opportunity was granted to the bidders to raise objections; however the said bidder did not avail the same. Thereafter, the financial bid was opened and the petitioner was declared L-1 (lowest bidder). The case of the petitioner was also recommended for issuance of work order by the Executive Engineer. Subsequently, the Tender Committee, vide decision dated 15.09.2025 (communicated on 16.09.2025), cancelled the tender process and directed re- tendering on the ground that the disqualified bidder was not afforded adequate opportunity.4. The order under challenge is the Letter dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure- P/7) issued by the Tender Committee, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned action is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that a concluded stage of tender evaluation cannot be nullified on untenable and extraneous considerations.

6. Learned counsel further submits that even the basis of the impugned action is factually unsustainable. It is pointed out that the petitioner has brought on record, by way of supplementary affidavit, a letter dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure- P/8 to the supplementary affidavit) issued by the concerned bidder, namely Praveen Kumar, addressed to the competent authority, wherein he has categorically stated that he had mistakenly not submitted the requisite certificates and that he has neither filed any objection nor intends to do so in future.

The said matter is reproduced as under:-

7. It is further submitted that the said letter was forwarded by the Executive Engineer vide Memo No. 1490 dated 13.09.2025 (Annexure- P/9 to the supplementary affidavit) to the higher authority, thereby leaving no ambiguity regarding the position of the said bidder. The said document is reproduced as under:-

8. In view thereof, learned counsel submits that the very foundation of the impugned decision stands vitiated as the concerned bidder himself has accepted that he had mistakenly not submitted the requisite documents and waived any right to object. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is unsustainable in law and is liable to be set aside.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the responden