IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 5888 of 2008 BIVASH CHANDRA SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 25.07.2008 Heard. The petitioner and respondent No 5 responded to a notice inviting tender. The tender was in two parts, the technical bid and the financial bid. When technical bids were opened, it was found that the signature of respondent No 5, on various pages of the tender document, varied. On some pages, it was his initials, on some pages, it was his full signatures though all were of the same date. The Technical Bid Evaluation Committee took a very technical view of the matter and disqualified him. Respondent no 5 then petitioned the Superintending Engineer, the next superior who saw the matter to be very trivial and noticed the petitioner and respondent No 5 and in presence of the petitioner, full signatures were taken on the technical bid of respondent No 5. Respondent No 5 was, thus, declared eligible overruling the technical objection. This is what brought the petitioner here. A counter affidavit has been filed and on behalf of State, it is submitted that in the financial bid, respondent No 5 succeeded. He was awarded the contract and he has completed the work as well. In my view, the matter was too technical and too trivial for interference by this Court which is compounded by the 2 fact that the contract itself does not survive. No relief can, thus, be given to the petitioner under any circumstances. The writ petition, therefore, is dismissed as infructuous. M.E.H./ ( Navaniti Prasad Singh )