Civil Writ Petition No.2754 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2754 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.4.2011 M/s Chaudhary and company ...Petitioner Versus Food Corporation of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Gurminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Hari Pal Verma, Advocate for the respondents No.1 to 4 Mr. K.K.Goyal, Advocate for respondent no.5 ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This petition seeks a direction for opening of price bid of the petitioner which has been furnished in pursuance of tender notice dated 29.10.2010. Case of the petitioner is that it is a proprietorship firm owned by Prem Chand, who is also a partner in M/s Chaudhary Rice Mill. The said mill had some land. According to the tender notice for awarding contract of transportation, the bidder is required to possess immovable property to the extent of 10% of the contract value i.e. Rs.26,68,970/-. Since the petitioner has 1/4th share in the land which has been valued at rupees more than 50 lacs, it was eligible and though its technical bid was opened, the price bid having not been opened, this petition has been filed. Grievance of the petitioner is that it has been wrongly excluded from consideration in the tender process on an untenable plea of his not owning the requisite immovable property. Civil Writ Petition No.2754 of 2011 -2- In the reply stand taken is that immovable property was not in the name of proprietorship firm or in the name of proprietor but in the name of the firm of which petitioner is a partner and under the partnership deed the partner is not entitled to sell or alienate his share without consent of all other partners. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon revenue documents and sale deed in support of its claim. The stand on behalf of the respondent-Food Corporation of India is that sale deed was never annexed to the bid document and could not be taken into account. In absence thereof from the documents furnished with the bid, ownership of the petitioner as per requirement in the tender notice was not established. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties for sometime, we are of the view that the issue raised is a disputed question of fact. Forum of writ Court may not be appropriate for adjudication thereof. Let the said question be gone into in the first instance by an officer of higher rank. As suggested by learned counsel for the parties, the General Manager, Food Corporation of India may look into the record of the case and take a decision about eligibility of the petitioner in accordance with law within four weeks from today. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.3 state that the validity of bids already furnished will stand extended till the decision is taken by the General Manager. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge April 20, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge Civil Writ Petition No.2754 of 2011 -3-