HIGH cUURTNgE CHHATT‘cSGAgH AT§_I;I,MA§Pug Qggm: Hon’ble Shti Dhirendra Mishra g A Hnn’kln ¢hvi D RI t‘ andrgl’a i i v" u“; vlnl u‘uu. v Iuuuluniu a vw Writ Petition {C} No.$750 of 201i) Petitioner iWs. Rusia Book Statiunery: Rearrange and Genera: Suppier, Rishbha- Dev Chowk, Kawardna, DistbKavvaraha, (CG) thmugh its; Proprietor Kamikant Rusia Vs. Resoondents 1. The Union of india Through the Secretary, Government of india, I i iif‘iiSiTy' ' ' 5 Gr £ f‘ vUmmhf‘riCEtmf‘iS, u ‘ " Department of Telecommunications 46f‘ Nos-n, ll censuar 0.. k Bnawan, k . new kl n we" lk‘ .1- 1 10001 2 The Chief General Manager, BSNL, f‘ ohhauisgan. u' L. f‘ ozrcie, I l/l. N .amhardi. 'k i, Vidhansabha Road, Raipur (CG) n33t. A ‘ I‘ wén$rai 'I-Nim'iagei', go (S & M): 0/0 C.G.M.T., BSNL CG, Circie, Raipur (CG Present: Shri Rakes‘h' Kumar Dubey, counsei for the petitioner. Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Assh. Soiicitor General tor the Union of indie. QML $3 F! QE E (13.11.291e) in response to the notice dated 29.05.2010 (Annexure P-4) inviting “Expression oi interest” (for Short EDD) for the BSNL Franchisee ship, the petitioner submitted its offer along with requisite bank guarantee oi Rs.50,000/~ for territory Burg—6 and Durg-Y. However. respondent No.3 issued fresh advertisement inviting EOI tor the same territories for which, the petitioner has applied vide advertisement dated 26.09.2010 (Annexure P—B) and the respondents returned the original bank guarantee submitted against EOI ot BSNL Franchisee/ship along with communication \ x of Annexure P-‘i and P-2 and communicated that its bid has not een accepted. 2. Grievance of the petitioner, in met, is that the petitioner couid not participate in the fresh tender process commenced vide Annexure FLB on 2309,2010 as bank guarantee was returned with a communication that its bid has not been accepted. The respondents have aiso not assigned any reason for rejecting the offer of the petitioner vide Annexure P-i and P-2. 3. Heard learned counsei for the petitioner on admission. 4. From bare perusal of the tender notice ot' Annexure P-4, it is evident that last date of submission of tender forms was 22.06.2010 and the tenders were also to be opened on the same date at 12 noon. The petitioner in its writ petition has not disciosed as to what transpired on 22.06201 0, the date fixed for opening the bid. The only relief that the petitioner has prayed tor in this petition is that the respondents should be directed to tile reply detailing the grounds for. rejecting its bid and for quashing the rejection order dated 06.1 0.201 0. 5. From bare perusal of the documents Annexure P—1 and P-2, it is clear that by the aforesaid communication, original bank guarantee submitted by the petitioner has been returned as petitioner’s bid has not been accepted and it is not the rejection order. in the absence ot any pieadlngs in the writ petitiomwrth regard to the opening of bid, which was scheduled tor 22.06201 0, the petitioner is not entitled tor any reilef in this writ 6. b petition and we dismiss thwlimme. w, \f i 'H X‘ ‘ 2a . To /’ K WO Sd/- 3’ Dhirendra Mishrai 7i i r i r i' Sd/- i Judge , l ’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ Chandraka‘y ‘ pg Judge