^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram : Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, Hon'bleShri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, JJ. Writ Petition (Cl No. 5771 of 2008 Petitioner Respondents M/s. Ashok Singh, A-5 Class Contractor, Thanganpara, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Through : his authorized agent Munna Lal Choudhari, Son of Shri Durg Prasad Choudhari, aged about 51 years, R/o Village Rajpur, Tahsil and P.S. Rajpur,District Surguja (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : the Secretary, Department of Town Administration, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Rajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3. Nagar Panchayat, Rajpur, Through : its President, Nagar Panchayat, Rajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) 4. Collector, Surguja, District Surguja (C.G.) Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India Present: Shri P. P. Sahu, counselforthe petitioner. Shri J.K.Gilda, Addl. A.G. forthe State/respondents No.1 & 3. ORAL ORDER (Passedon26.11.2008) Petitioner by this instant petition has prayed for quashing of the entire tender proceedings initiated by respondent No.2 with respect of notice inviting tender published on 17.09.2008 in the local newspaper vide Annexure P 12. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that he is a registered contractor and was eligible to participate in the tender proceedings which were floated vide '^. — a^ public notice Annexure P/2. In the public notification, the last date for applying for tender was mentioned as 18.09.2008. However, when the petitioner contacted the office ofthe respondent No.2, he was informed that the last date has been extended upto 25.09.2008 and the same has been duly notifiedin other newspapers. Thereafter, the petitioner has applied for issuance of the tender form on 22.09.2008. However, tender form was not issued to him and the petitioner complained about non-issuance of tender form to superior authorities of the respondents as well as respondent - Nagar Panchayat, Rajpur on 29.09.2008. Even then no action was taken in staying the tender proceedings and thereafter the whole tender proceedings were initiated on the basis of notice inviting tender vide Annexure P/2. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. The petitioner claims that he had prayed for issuance of tender form on 22.09.2008. However, no document has been filed by the petitioner to establish this fact as no receipt has been filed regarding filing of such application. We also find that the petitioner did not complain either before the Nagar Panchayat or before the superior authorities of the respondents for non-issuance of tender form despite the application made by the petitioner. Therefore, we are of considered opinion that the petition is bereft of any document to substantiate the allegation of prejudice against the petitioner. 4. There is no substance in this writ petition which deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge OA^