CW 843/04 – Hukam Singh Rathore Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 1/3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.843/2004 Hukam Singh Rathore Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date : 19.02.2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. M.C. Purohit for the petitioner. Mr. V.K. Mathur for the respondents. --------- 1. Heard learned counsels. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the allotment of tea stall No.3 on the Central Railway Bus Stand at Raika Bag, Jodhpur. 3. The case of the petitioner is that notice inviting tender was published in the news paper vide annex.1 and tenders were to be opened on 30.12.2003 at 3 PM on the same day and the earnest money of Rs.5,000/- was paid in cash and after opening of the tender 3 times of the licence fees as per highest bid or Rs.30,000/- whichever was more, was to be deposited as security deposit on the same date. 4. The petitioner has come with the case that he had CW 843/04 – Hukam Singh Rathore Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 2/3 deposited the earnest money of Rs.5,000/- on 30.12.2003 and since his tender of monthly licence fees bid of Rs.15,069/- per month was found highest, the bid was accepted by the respondent RSRTC and 3 times of that of Rs.45,207/- he tendered by a cheque of State Bank of India, Raika Bag Branch, Jodhpur to the respondent, which they refused to accept and bid of the next person was accepted by the RSRTC. 5. Being aggrieved of this action, the petitioner approached this Court. 6. The respondents have given a reply to the writ petition with which they have annexed the tender conditions and condition No.6 of the tender condition clearly stipulates that the said security deposit of Rs.10,000/- or 3 times of monthly licence fees was to be deposited in cash on the same date of opening of the tender i.e. 30.12.2003. 7. The petitioner has not produced with the Annex.4 letter dated 30.12.2003 in which fact of giving of cheque of State Bank of India, Raika Bag Branch, Jodhpur is mentioned. Neither the date of CW 843/04 – Hukam Singh Rathore Vs. State & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 3/3 the cheque nor cheque number is given in the said letter nor a copy of the said cheque has been produced by the petitioner. Though giving of cheque of the same date could be taken as a valid tender of money but in absence of this evidence produced by the petitioner, it is not established as to whether the condition of the tender of deposit of 3 times of the monthly licence fees of Rs.30,000/- whichever is more, was deposited by the petitioner at the same date or not. In view of the clear stipulation of the tender condition No.6 that the said security deposit was to be given in cash, admittedly when a cheque against such condition was tendered by the petitioner, it cannot be taken to be a sufficient compliance with the tender condition and with that situation, the respondents cannot be faulted in having accepted the bid of next person. 8. The writ petition is found to be devoid of merit. The same is accordingly dismissed. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.38 babulal/-