IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1752 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16272 of 2010 With Interlocutory application No. 7986 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1752 of 2011 ====================================================== Pradeep Raj Upadhyay, M/S P.R. Upadhyay & Associates (Chartered Accountants) at Nawada Gaya Road, Near St. Josheph's School, Par Nawada, P.S.-Nawada, Distt.- Nawada .... .... Petitioner/Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Health Society, Nawada Gola Road, Nawada, Pin- 805110 (Bihar). 3. Civil Surgeon Cum Member Secretary, District Health Society, Nawada Gola Road, Nawada, Pin-805110 4. The Collector Cum District Magistrate, Nawada, Pin - 805110 .... .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar Prasad, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Ms. Nutan Sharma, A.C. to G.A. 5. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 23-11-2011 Re. Interlocutory application No. 7986 of 2011: The delay of 80 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1752 of 2011: Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 5th May 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 16272 of 2010, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Patna High Court LPA No.1752 of 2011 (2) dt.23-11-2011 2 / 2 2 Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The appellant is a Chartered Accountant functioning as M/s P.R. Upadhyay @ Associates. In answer to the public advertisement, the appellant offered the service as Chartered Accountant to the respondent-Bihar Health Society, Nawada for a monthly fee of Rs. 20,000/-. The appellant’s offer was not accepted. The service offered by one D.Jha and Associates for a monthly fee of Rs. 9,500/- was accepted by the respondents. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed above writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The appellant claimed that as the off-set monthly fee determined was Rs. 20,000/-, his offer ought to have been accepted by the respondents. The learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition as the respondents have accepted the offer that charged far lesser fee. We see no substance in the claim made by the appellant. Merely because the off set monthly rate determined was Rs. 20,000/-, the respondents were not bound to accept the offer made at the monthly fee of Rs. 20,000/- when the others were ready and willing to render service for a lesser fee. By mere making the offer the appellant did not acquire right to a service contract. The claim made by the appellant is devoid of any merit. The learned single Judge has rightly rejected the claim. No case for interference is made out. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)