wp1897.11 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1897 OF 2011 Sau Vandana Ravindra Chaudhari ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. D.S. Bagul, advocate for the petitioner Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 Mr. R.N. Dhorde h/f Mr. S.B. Gorde, advocate for R. No.3 ,7 and 8 Mr. M.S. Karnik h/f Mr. A.B. Kale, adv. For respondent No.6 ..... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 29TH AUGUST, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 On the last date, the matter was adjourned so as to enable the petitioner to take instructions as to whether she was willing to offer the bid better than that of respondent No.6. 2 The respondent No.6 has offered bid of ` 45.48 Crores. wp1897.11 -2- 3 Shri Bagul, learned counsel on the last date made a statement that the petitioner is willing to make an offer for ` 48.00 Crores. However, today, the learned counsel in presence of representative of the petitioner, who is present in the court, makes a statement that as the petitioner has been refused to grant financial assistance by the financial institutions, she is not willing to offer the better bid than that of respondent No.6. 4 The petition basically challenges the decision making process by the respondent No.3. It was argued on the last date that the decision making process is vitiated on the ground of bias attitude on part of some of the officers/Directors of the respondent No.3 Bank. 5 It was also pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner that for entertaining the petition challenging bias, unless the person against whom such allegations are made is party respondents and unless such allegations are specifically averred in the petition, it is not possible for this court to entertain such challenge. Even as of today, no steps are taken either for incorporating said persons as party respondents and making the averments in the petition in that respect. 6 In that view of the matter, we cannot entertain oral submissions wp1897.11 -3- as made by the petitioner in that regard. 7 The basic grievance of the petitioner was that final bids which were in the sealed envelops were opened by the authorized Officer in presence of Board of Directors in its meeting in absence of the petitioner. 8 Perusal of the terms and conditions of the tender, would reveal that all bidders were made known that the final bid in the sealed envelops will be opened by the authorized Officer in presence of the Board of Directors in its meeting. The said condition was never challenged. 9 Inspite of these, we were inclined to entertain the petition taking into consideration the larger interest of the Bank and in as much as the petitioner had offered substantial higher amount than the bid of respondent No.6. 10 Since now the petitioner herself has backed out from the tender process, we find that the petition is not bonafide one. 11 As already discussed herein above, the allegations regarding wp1897.11 -4- bias cannot be entertained. In so far as the decision to open the bids by the authorized officer in presence of the Board of Directors is concerned, the same was one of the condition which the petitioner has accepted. 12 In that view of the matter, no case is made out to entertain the petition. The petition is dismissed. 13 On account of interim orders passed by this Court on 26.4.2011, the entire tender process was stalled for a period of more than four months Though on account of interim orders, the respondent Nos. 3 and 6 have suffered substantial financial loss, learned counsel appearing for the said respondents fairly state that they are not interested in the costs. However, the matter was heard for more than an hour on the last date. The petition was entertained, since we found that by entertaining the petition, the respondent No.3 would get substantial higher amount. 14 As already discussed herein above, since the petition is not bonafide one, the petitioner shall deposit cost amount of ` 50,000/- in this court within a period of two weeks from today. Out of the said amount, an amount of ` 25,000/- will be paid to the High Court Legal wp1897.11 -5- Services Sub Committee, Aurangabad and remaining amount of ` 25,000/- shall be paid to the Library, High Court Bar Association, Bench at Aurangabad. ( M. T. JOSHI, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.) rlj/