Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S Krishan & Co vs Haryana Warehousing Corporation And ... on 21 April, 2011

Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel

Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Ajay Kumar Mittal

Civil Writ Petition No.5572 of 2011                             -1-

                                      ****


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH

                   Civil Writ Petition No.5572 of 2011
                   Date of decision: 21.4.2011

M/s Krishan & Co.                                        ...Petitioner

                                Versus

Haryana Warehousing Corporation and others

                                                         ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
      HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL


Present: Mr. R.K.Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner

         Mr. K.K.Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

         Mr. Balraj Singh, Advocate for respondent no.3.

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

This petition seeks quashing of orders dated 31.1.2011 Annexures P-3 and P-4 abandoning the tender process and renewing the existing contract in favour of respondent no.3.

Case of the petitioner is that in pursuance of tender notice dated 6.1.2011 Annexure P-1 for appointment of handling contractor, the petitioner gave its bid @ 195% above SOR. The bid was not accepted as the existing rate was much lower i.e. 137% above SOR. Accordingly, the tender process was abandoned and existing contract was renewed.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that since the bid of the petitioner was lowest, the contract should be awarded to it cannot be accepted. If the existing rate was lower than the bid given by the petitioner, there is no illegality in existing contract being renewed. It has been pointed Civil Writ Petition No.5572 of 2011 -2- **** out that even during negotiation the petitioner declined to reduce the rate. Thus, decision not to award contract to the petitioner cannot be held to be arbitrary. No ground is made out for interference with the impugned orders.

Dismissed.




                                             (Adarsh Kumar Goel)
                                                      Judge


April 21, 2011                                (Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Pka                                                  Judge