CWP No.4111 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition.No.4111 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 8.7.2011 M/s B.L.Mehta Constructions Pvt. Limited ... Petitioner Versus Chandigarh Housing Board and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Sr.Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Adarsh Kumar Goel, ACJ. 1. This petition seeks quashing of allotment of work of construction of flats in Sector 63, Chandigarh by the Chandigarh Housing Board vide letter dated 4.3.2011 in violation of order of this Court dated 22.11.2010. 2. Case set out in the petition is that in pursuance of tender notice dated 5.5.2010, the petitioner was one of the bidders but its technical bid was wrongly rejected on 3.11.2010 against which CWP No.20081 of 2010 was filed stating that the rejection of technical bid was arbitrary and the petitioner was declared ineligible without any valid basis. This Court directed that the Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board may give a hearing to the petitioner and take an appropriate decision in the matter about the eligibility of the petitioner. Accordingly, the 1 CWP No.4111 of 2011 Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board took a decision in favour of the petitioner and ordered the opening of financial bid of the petitioner. The financial bid of the petitioner was opened on 3.12.2010 and was found to be lowest. Inspite of this decision, the Board took a decision not to consider the bid of the petitioner. Without considering the bid of the petitioner, respondent No.5 whose rate was higher than the rate quoted by the petitioner was issued letter of intent. 3. Reply has been filed on behalf of the Chandigarh Housing Board and the factual aspect that the petitioner was found to be eligible, has not been disputed. It has also not been disputed that ignoring the bid of the petitioner, the Housing Board took a decision to negotiate only with respondent No.5. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the Chandigarh Housing Board. 5. Once the decision has been taken by the Chairman in pursuance of orders of this Court, which has not been challenged by either party ignoring the bid of the petitioner which is said to be the lowest without giving it hearing is clearly arbitrary and cannot be sustained. 6. Accordingly, we allow this petition and direct the Chandigarh Housing Board to take a fresh decision in the matter in accordance with law. The decision may be taken within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Acting Chief Justice July 8, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge 2 CWP No.4111 of 2011 3