m.° l?IIvi"1-s;' SlaBfiS 9gt'i».S«?;ilyyaiiiis! F)CT0/ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION fCIVIL) No. ~7& ^3 / 2006 PETITIONER ^ •VA^ ^- ^v^.^- Y^'" M/s M.B RUBBER PVT. LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SHVIPANMEHTA REGISTERED OFFICEAT 195,GAGANVIHAR DELm-110051 >Sff- VERSUS RESPONDENTS .00^ e> ^'^ '• M3 .<-Si y^y—~ -s^ s*sr^^^sy^ ^0*^ '^W^—'&fKy ^P'Gi^ STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY D.K.S BHAWAN, RAI PPUR CHATTISGARH. 2. CHHATTISGARH STATE MINOR FOREST PRODUCE (TRADWG AND DEVELOPMENT)CO-OP FEDERATION LTD THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A-25, V.I.P. ESTATE, NEAR V.I.P CLUB KHAMARDIH, SHANKAR NAGAR RAJPUR-492007 CIVIL WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE'226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT/ ORDER/ DIRECTION XI-HC-22 an^T^iT f?7R) 311^1 st»lit)Hf?(T Stllllt) 35? '<ii<ii<-|i|, ®Tntf'i6,fsifiiuy ^..wS...^..^J^^ t<|l|<-ll !*>*<!* ••'•••••••••-••—••i-^ 200 R*<d ? b / 3TI^T?TaTW:(rfN Hon'bie Mr.V.K. Shrivastava & ca'Ee Shri A.K. Bajpai and Shri V^ Shri Prashant Mishra, State/respondent No.1 and he respondent No.2 with Shri Vivek R[ Shri A.K. Singh, Managir| Forest Produce Co-op Federation With consent of the partie; staae. The factuai mstrix of the notification dated 13-1-2006 cal certain specincations and aiso competent authority. Petitioner Even along with the tender respondent No.2. When technical for financial bid was published or^ not inciuded therein. Hence, this '4 Respondents contested th| ground that petitioner aithougl manufacturing shoes, but it does expanded PVC Sole. On 29-1-2007 this Court cj cenificates, as requlred by respc^ wit'n direct injected expanded PVC| V^run Mishra, counsel forthe petitioner. Addl. Advocate Genera! for the a!so appears as Sr. Advocate for R^njan Tiwari, Advocate. ^g Director, Chhattisgarh State Minor -imited, Raipur is also present. j, the mattsr was finally heard at motion iLii petititiner +i'iiF<-f'ifl-f Kit<<-iT^'Ts'-i'l <Ri<^i< ^ari^Tan^r >, in short, is that respondent No.2 vide sd tender for suppiy of shoes having desired reoistration certificate from the others submitted their tender forms. sent samples of shoes/footwear to bid was opened and iist of competitors 7-12-2006, name of the petitioner was ^rit petition. 1^ claim of the petitioner on the sole ih having reflistration certificate for ^iotlinciude footoear with direct injected lirected the respondenSs to fl!e re!evant tident No.2 in NiT, regarding footA'ear ]sole furnished by other bidders. XI-HC-22 an^r^T l^ri^sn^T Sblichflfsn •wn 'SSf rt||<||c1<|, ®Tflu'16,RlMIUy —...^...^g.llG6L. KI*<MI **<!* •••-"'••••••••••••••(^200 Rre^ 3)1^1 g'lrd|ifftHf?(T z the course of respondents frankiy conceded tl^i such registration certiflcates, but by the Ministry of Commerce regarding receipt of memorandum| When other bidders haviilr financial bid how a discriminatort' taken. it is direct infringement oi] stand. Undisputea'Iy, petitioner Vi[ the criteria to compste. in view of the above, we sl facts and circumstances of the c^; to participate in financia! bid. Ac4 the respondents are dlrected financia! bid. Consequently, M.(W.).P.N4; -11637/2006 & 740/2007 stand Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- V-K.Shrivastava Judge c^se <til<ltt"l<fl-l 111llT?i;I*5'<rl <Rl'KK ^srf^'n'sn^T srsuments, learned counsel for the at though other bidders have not fiied -;ave submitfed ackno'iivledgement given |and Industries, Govemment of India, for manufaeture of PVC footwear. ig ho such registration are allowed in action against the petitloner couid be his right, which cannot be permitted to ith regard to other'conditions is fuifiiling re of the considered opinion that in the i, the petitioner cannot be deprived of •ordlngiy, the writ petition is aliowed and atlow the petitioner to take part in the s.5001/2006 & 5050/2006 and i.A.Nos. of. disbosed Sd/- UhirendraMtebra Judge (^y^) 2Gc