{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5364 OF 2009 Mahavir Kamgar Auduyogik Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., Beed PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.A.B.Girase, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.N.N.Jadhav, AGP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 17th August 2009 PER COURT: 1. This is a petition at the behest of a contractor who, on the face of it, is ineligible as per the tender notice issued by the respondents, who seeks to challenge the conditions imposed in the tender notice. 2. The condition which is the subject matter of challenge in the present petition is - “Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai now invites sealed tenders on turnkey basis in “C” Form (Lump Sum offer basis) for the construction of modular pre-fabricated kitchen sheds in various districts in Maharashtra with the estimated cost of Rs. 60,000/- per kitchen shed from the Contractors with proven experience in similar type of work registered as Class I and above the PWD, Government of Maharashtra, CIDCO, MHADA, MMRDA, {2} MSRDC and other Corporation of Government of Maharashtra, MCGM and other Municipal Corporations and Councils in Maharashtra State, CPWD and Corporations of Central Government, Railways, MES in appropriate class equivalent to PWD Government of Maharashtra and who have satisfactorily completed at least one similar work in India.” The Second condition which has been challenged is reproduced below - The contractor shall obtain the approval of material for various tests which are required for durability, serviceability and stability aspect. The valid test certificate from CBRI Roorkee (Central Building Reserarch Institute Roorkee) shall be submitted at the time of tender submission. The material including sandwich panel shall fulfill all the requirement of durability, serviceability and stability aspect. It shall be clearly mention in test certificate that all the material is acceptable as per relevant Indian Standard specifications, Codes and National Building Code.” 3. Undisputedly, the petitioner is ineligible on account of the terms and conditions set out in the tender in respect of eligibility of persons to submit the tender. Undisputedly also the petitioner has not submitted the tender. The tender notice came to be issued in newspaper dated 5th August 2009 inviting tenders in respect of various districts of Maharashtra from firms experienced in pre-fabricating construction work. It is also challenged before us that the cost of the said pre- fabricated kitchen is established at Rs.60,000/- whereas the cost in reality would be about Rs.40,000/- to Rs.45,000/-. It is also urged before us that by virtue of terms which are stated in the tender notice a sort of monopoly would be created as many tenderers would not be qualified and eligible to participate in the tender process. 4. Undisputedly, the petitioner is an ineligible contractor as {3} per the terms set out. This, therefore, would be a challenge in the nature of public interest raised by the petitioner. It cannot be said to be public interest petition because the petitioner is a contractor who is now ineligible on account of the terms set out in the tender notice. In any event, bids submitted pursuant to the said tender notice would be opened on 18th August 2009 i.e. tomorrow for finalization of the financial bids. In that light of what has been stated above and further according to us, the petitioner cannot question the terms and conditions set out in the tender notice particularly when we have not find that there are any discrimination, the petition deserves to be dismissed. A reference may usefully be made to the judgment reported in case of “Tata Celluler”. In the light of that, therefore, there are no merits in the petition and hence dismissed summarily with no order as to costs. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/wp5364-09