-^^ i. ^ ^ HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram: Petitioner Hon' ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, & Hon' ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ Writ Petition (Cl No. 6335 of 2010 M/s. Mahendra Singh Chhabra, aged about 36 years, (C & F agent Grasim Cement, Ultratech Cement & Govt. Contractor) r/o.Shri Ram Tower Shop No. C/01, Ground Floor, VyaparVihar, District Bilaspur ^ Vs. Respondents. 1. Chhattisgarh State Marketing Federation Limited Bilaspur, through its District Marketing Officer, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Deputy Collector, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Marketing Federation Limited, Bilaspur. 4. M/s. Tama Trading Company through its Proprietor, Arvind Kumar, aged about 32 years, r/o. Tikrapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG). (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India.) Present: Smt. Renu Kochar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shailendra Shukla, counsel for respondenton Caveat. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Deputy Advocate General for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 29-10-2010) Per Dhirendra Mishra. J, 1. Heard. 5> Grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 was not eligible to participate in the tender process initiated by respondent No.1 vide Annexure P/1 as per clause 29 of the tender document. His earnest money was forfeited as he did not complete the work though he entered into agreement with respondent No.1. At the time of opening of the tender this objection was raised by the petitioner herein. However, without deciding the objection the respondent No.4 was called for negotiations and the tender committee has recommended to award the work to respondent No.4. Shri Shailendra Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 on caveat submits that the recommendation of the tender committee is finally to be decided by the Managing Director of the respondent No.1, who alone is the competent authority to take a decision in awarding the work. If the petitioner submits his objection to the award of contract to respondent No.4 on the grounds raised in this petition before the competent authority i.e., Managing Director, the same shall be considered and decided in objective manner. In view of theabove submission made by learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, theinstant petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file objection along with copy of this order before the competent authority/Managing Director withina period ofthree days from today, who in turn shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law. Certified copy today as per rules. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge Raju