Sr. No. 17

Regular

IN THE HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

LPA No. 35/2021

Union Territory of J&K and Ors.

…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. M.A. Chashoo, AAG.

Vs.

M/S Zahoor and Company.

...Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Aswad Atar, Advocate.

Vice Mr. R.A. Jan, Sr. Advocte.

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE.

ORDER

28.06.2022

1.

Heard Sh. M.A. Chashoo, learned AAG appearing for the appellants.

2.

The appellants have preferred this Letters Patent Appeal against the

judgment and order dated 15.01.2021, passed by the Writ Court

disposing of WPC No. 2017/2020 “M/s Zahoor and Company V. UT of

J&K and Others=.

3.

The Writ Court by the aforesaid judgment has disposed of the writ

petition without granting any relief to the petitioner therein but with a

liberty to him to claim compensation from the respondent-appellants for

his wrongful exclusion from the tendering process.

4.

For the sake of convenience the operative portion of the aforesaid

judgment is reproduced herein: -

<In the facts and circumstances narrated above, this

petition is disposed of by holding that the rejection of technical

bid of the petitioner by respondent No.3 was illegal, arbitrary

and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

However, no relief is being granted to the petitioner for the

reason that petitioner had been late in approaching the Court

and guilty of allowing the tender process to proceed further as

also suppressing from the Court that financial bid had already

been opened and M/S Muzaffar Ahmad Rather had emerged

successful. As a result whereof 3^rd party rights have come to be

created. Any order passed in favour of the petitioner in this

petition would adversely affect the successful tenderer M/S

Muzaffar Ahmad Rather, who is not a party respondent in this

petition. The petitioner, however, shall be at liberty to file a

fresh petition arraying M/S Muzaffar Ahmad Rather as party

respondent or else claim compensation from the respondents

for his wrongful exclusion from the tendering process and his

participation in the price bid by availing appropriate remedy

available under civil law.=

5.

The submission of Sh. M.A. Chashoo, learned AAG, is that the liberty

granted by the Writ Court to claim compensation is unwarranted. The

Court has observed that the petitioner was excluded from the technical

bid illegally, arbitrarily and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Therefore, the only thing which the Court has now to do is to determine

the compensation.

6.

The Writ Court in disposing of the writ petition has admittedly not

granted any relief to the petitioner therein. The liberty granted to the

petitioner therein to seek compensation for his wrongful exclusion from

the tendering process even if, not granted is otherwise available to the

petitioner therein for the reason no one can stop any party from filing a

Civil Suit or for claiming damages or compensation.

7.

In view of the above, even if the liberty had not been granted, it was

open for the petitioner therein to initiate proceedings of the civil nature

for claiming compensation. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that as in

the petition no relief has been granted against the appellants, and the

liberty granted is inherent, the appeal is misconceived and is dismissed.

(JAVED IQBAL WANI)

(PANKAJ MITHAL)

(JUDGE)

(CHIEF JUSTICE)

SRINAGAR

28.06.2022

Junaid