Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gyanodyaya Group vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2014
Writ Petition No.11664.2014
04/08/2014
Shri Aseem Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri K.S.Wadhwa, learned Additional Advocate
General for respondents.
The tender submitted by the petitioner has been rejected on account of some error in drafting the FDR submitted by way of a Bank Draft.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, we find that the competent authority exercised its discretion for rejecting the tender, which has been occurred on account of error in Bank Drft. The competent authority prima facie did not find the same to be in accordance to be requirement under the rules.
In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to issue any mendamus in the matter or to interfere with the matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said error is technical in nature and the Bank has to rectify the same.
If that be so respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and any other superior officers is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner if any representation is made and to take action in accordance with the law.
With the aforesaid direction, we disposed of this petition.
(Rajendra Menon) (Alok Verma)
Judge Judge
manju