IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. (1). S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.585/2009 M/s ShreeDadijee Pliytubes Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs.State of Raj. & Ors. (2). S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1779/2009 M/s Kothari Fnalex Limited & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order : 28.05.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr. M.M.Ranjan for petitioner(s). Mr. G.S.Bapna Advocate General for State. Since the controversy raised in these writ petitions is common, therefore, they are being decided by a common order with the consent of both the parties. By the writ petition No. 585/2009, the petitioner(s) are seeking compliance of the agreement dated 23.10.2008 (Annexure/3) for the supply of ISI Marked unplasticized PVC Pipes for Elastomeric Sealing Ring type Joints and further challenged the short term NIT dated 17.12.2008 for supply of the same material. This Court passed an interim order on 21.01.2009 giving liberty to the respondents to finalise the tender proceedings if any other order is passed in tender proceedings, the result whereof shall be kept in sealed cover. The main submission of the counsel for the petitioner(s) is that as per Minutes of the Meeting dated 21.10.2005 and agreement dated 23.10.2008, the 75% supply is to be made by the petitioner(s), therefore, there was no justification for inviting the Short Term NIT dated 17.12.2008 in case they are subsisting. The advocate General Mr. G.S.Bapna appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submits that the negotiations have already been taken place with tenders including the petitioner (s) who is also participated in the tender proceedings in pursuance to NIT dated 17.12.2008 without there being any protest. At this stage, the counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that after passing of the interim order dated 21.01.2009, the prices as gone up, therefore, re-negotiation is necessary and he may also be given liberty to raise the objection with regard to not taking supply for it as per the aforesaid orders. The writ petition No. 1779/2009 is also identical as per both the counsel. I have considered the aforesaid submissions of the parties and in my view, the ends of justice would met in case the respondents held the Meeting for re-negotiation and considered the aforesaid orders passed in favour of the petitioner(s) in the year 2005 and 2008 and further pass the appropriate order within a period of 15 days from today with regard to NIT dated 17.12.2008. Both the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. (PREM SHANKER ASOPA),J. Gandhi S/1-2