M/S Jai Maa Sherawali Constructions, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7361 of 2022 ====================================================== M/s Jai Maa Sherawali Constructions, Partnership Firm, through its Partner namely Kamlesh Kumar Singh, aged about 50 Years, Male, Son of Mundrika Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Pema, PlS.-Madanpur, DistrictAurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar. 3.

The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Works Department, Bihar. 4.

The Superintendent Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Circle, Aurangabad.

5.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Aurangabad. 6.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Daudnagar. 7.

The Nodal Officer, PMGSY, BRRDA Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr.Vipin Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Janmejay Giridhar, Advocate Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Archana Meenakshee, GP 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 27-07-2022 Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

2/4

3/4 Shri Bindhyachal Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, clarifies that he does not lay challenge to the decision with regard to bidding process in question. What really the petitioner is aggrieved of, is the outcome of the decision dated 05.05.2022 (Annexure-3, Page 36), which may have a bearing on the other contracts/tenders for which the petitioner may bid. We find that while passing the order rejecting the petitioner's technical bid, no notice to show cause was ever issued to the petitioner in terms of communication dated 27.01.2022 (Annexure-2, Page 34). As such, we direct the findings recorded by the authority qua the petitioner in decision dated 05.05.2022 (Annexure-3 Page-36) to be non est. Further clarifying that our order shall have no bearing on the instant bid, for which the petitioner had submitted the bid led to such a decision. However, for future works, petitioner shall be afforded opportunity of hearing, as mandated by law, whereafter only decision shall be taken on the issue of eligibility.

All other issues are left open to be raised by the petitioner before the appropriate authority or any other

4/4 subsequent proceedings.

Petition disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) Sujit/Ashwini AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 30.07.2022 Transmission Date