IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.12626 of 2010 Date of decision: 9.8.2010 M/s Dashmesh Logistics Co. -----Petitioner. Vs. State of Haryana & others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This petition seeks quashing of letter dated 10.6.2010, Annexure P-10, reiterating the rejection of tender of the petitioner on the ground of its ineligibility as per conditions laid down in the Tender Notice dated 23.4.2010, Annexure P-4. 2. Case of the petitioner is that it is a partnership firm working for the last about four years. By the Tender Notice, the work of transportation of gypsum was sought to be allotted, for which one of the conditions was that the tenderer should have the requisite experience. Tender of the petitioner was rejected, against which the petitioner gave a legal notice, to which no decision was taken. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was CWP No.12626 of 2010 disposed of on 4.5.2010 with a direction to decide legal notice of the petitioner. Thereafter, by impugned order, legal notice of the petitioner was rejected with the following reasons:- “It has been replied to the Advocate that your client did not fulfill the pre-qualification conditions of tender documents i.e. experience of transportation for last 5 years and submission of documents of having 5 tralla/trucks in the name of the firm.......” xx xx xx xx xx “The prequalification bid of M/s Dashmesh Logistics Co. was unanimously rejected by Tender Evaluation Committee on 23.4.2010 as the Committee found that petitioner was not fulfilling the experience for 5 years and registration certificates copies of 5 Nos. Tralla/Trucks in the name of tendering firm i.e. M/s Dashmesh Logistics Co., Shop No.134, Mandi Dabwali Distt. Sirsa, Haryana were not attached with prequalification bids and agreed by Sh. Ramesh Krishan, IAS, Managing Director of HLRDC. The petitioner submitted attested by Notary two registration certificates only in the name of M/s Dashmesh Logistics Co. bearing no.HR-39A-7862 and HR-39A-7863. Thus Clause No.12 of tender condition was not fulfilled.” 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to show any error in the impugned letter in holding that the petitioner was not eligible for want of requisite experience. 5. In view of above, there is no ground to interfere. 6. The petition is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 09, 2010 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2