IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2575 of 2005 Sadanand Singh Construction Private Limited through its Managing Director Sadanand Singh, S/o late Medni Singh, R/o Village + P.s.- Dharhara, District-Munger. …….. Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through its Secretary, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna. 2. Engineer-in-Chief Cum Additional Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna. 3. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur. 4. Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation Circle, Kharagpur, Munger. 5. Superintending Engineer, Planning and Monitoring Circle IV, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation Division, Tarapur, Munger. ….. Respondents. For the petitioner : Mr. Shankar Dayal Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, AC to G.A.-1. ----------- 2. 25.01.2011 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging letter dated 27.01.2005 (Annexure-1) issued by the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Irrigation Division, Government of Bihar (Respondent no. 6) informing that the tender has been cancelled and process for fresh tender is going to be initiated afresh in which the petitioner will be at liberty to participate. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently challenges the said impugned letter claiming that the order for cancellation was arbitrary and capricious and had prejudicially affected the right and interest of the petitioner. - 2 - 4. From the impugned letter itself, it is quite apparent that the aforesaid tender was with respect to various works including rehabilitation work (repair of earth work and bridges) from Chain No. 02530 Ch. of Badua Left Main Canal under Irrigation Division, Tarapur of worth Rs. 1.37 crore. It is also apparent that the tender papers were to be sent by the bidders in sealed cover and was to be opened before the Chief Engineer, but the seal of the envelop containing tender of one of the bidders was found to be broken and accordingly the technical bid was found to be unacceptable and hence the tender was cancelled, information of which was sent to the petitioner by the impugned letter also informing him that fresh tender notice is going to be published in which he may be at liberty to participate. 5. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly, dismissed. Sujit (S. N. Hussain, J.)