x^^' ff dll^SII W ft-fi* Wff^ff^l Slf>Iti<ti '3^ •^I^H*I, ®Til'y'i<c,I"i<'iiyi< *<I*ICTI <n*ii^ •W[ 200 -s^twv ('ic''l'i"*?) BWinK THfttI wAv MVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. DHIREN&^A MISHRA <S HON'BLE MR. R.N. CHA^DRAKAR- JJ W.P.tCl &.6982 of 2007 (Petitien undet* Ar-ticie 2^ PETITIQNER Vs RESPON&ENTS bhirendra Mishra. J: 1. The oetitioner has filed thd order dated 19.11.2007. (An^ has refused to issue tenderl thort' he has not comoleted ec4'lier <& Commerciai Comolex withml «w^iepihW^ff ^f1^T3^ <f^*^f< ^ sifiCT sn^ii o OT Tfle fcOnsTi'tuTiWI 6T inoiaj Suraj N|arayan Sharma, son of Late Wari Prasad Shsrma, agsd about 36 years, ftesident of Near- Jain (|iandir, Tilda Nevra, bistrict Raipur (ChhQtti^garh) 1. Stat^ of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, t)epc|rTment of Urban AdiBinistration and Oev^lopment, Mantralaya, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipjir (Chhattisgar'h) 2. Aunjcipa! Corporation, Tiida Nevra, through the j;hief Wiunicipal Officer, Akunicipal Council, Tild4 Nevra, Raipur, (Chhattis9arh) PresenT: AAr. Sanjay K Aqarwal, Advocate wifh r. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for the petitionsr. ffir. U.N.S. tSeo, 6ovt. Advocate for tlte State. H\f. B.P.Rao, Advocatefor the resporjdents. OftAll OftDE (21st ^pril, 2009) instant petition for quashing of the exure P-7) whereby respondent No.2 form to the petitioner on the ground construction works of Muktidham the stipuiated period. WEpSN^R^BH^T ^< ff-S.'Sk 1 y 3|I^IWl<-l wn aii^ia>*il<i> 'yer '<II<<I<IAI, (STilwre, fawi'yy <im?n a»*<i«*» ••Wl200 an^sT 'vw (yiy^t) ttyrar ^ff^n oti^ 2. Learned counsel fop the pet was not issued to the oetil powers conferred under Rull Rutes, 1971, which envisaoesl the Dersons who mav have) contracts of whatever amount. However, he submits comptetion of the above extended by the Chief 29.10.2007 (Annexure P-4) f( thus, the stipulated time Annexure P-4 was 29.tl.; dated 6.11.2007 (Annexure tender form was 22.11.2001 tender form was 28.11.2007] completina The earlier work the last date of submiss respondent No.2 uuas not ius^ oetitioner under Rule 139 (21 3. Mr. Rao, tearned counsel for dispute thot the time for for a month vide order dated flor 2007. qOTferih'WRffi'^ Is'<3 <Rit<,i<. ioner submit? Wn fa +anri»r> fnffn "ioner in the ourport'ed exercise of 139 (2) of the Municipal Accounts Ithat contracts shali not be aiven to failed to comoiete their orevious natilre within the stipulffted time cnd that in the instant case the time for w^>rk dliotted to the petitioner wos A^unicipa! Officer vide order doted >r a further period of one month and completing the work in view of As per Notice Inviting Tender P-5) the last date for issuance of and the fast date for submitt'inq and as such, the time silowed for h|ad not come to an ecdon 28.11.2007, jion of tender forms. Therefore, justified in refusino tender form to the (>f the Ruies, 1971. jespondent No.2-Corporation does not coni&ietion of eariier work was extended 129.10.07 (Annexure P-4), however, he ^re^t?^^ F ^^\ *», SSKSS:s g 'S 'S J' S sqr^T'^T'R^W "(Pff 3H^t WIW Roshan/- 'S'SEI '^l^ld4!, aflly'is, facii'yy *1WWI fl»*<l«t> •Wt 200 StI^T 'q^T ('i'lil'"*4) C^flW t<(^a <*ll^¥l bubiiiilb Ihul lliy ptil'illuiitii ilorited enU earlier work eyen after expj work remains incomplete ever) 4. We have heard learned counst 5. After hearinq learned col considerina the fact that thel form i.e. 28.11.2007. stipul ^ y admitredlv not come to an not Justified in refusinq the ground that the oetitioner d| to the petitioner by the 6, In the result.the tender on the basis of Notice Invitii P-5) is vitiated for not issuir accordingly, the same is heret to respondent No.Z-Municipal tender process in accordance 7. No order as to costs. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge <*>]<<f<"l<l"l'l IWdf 4 frA <h«;i< ^T ^ffRpT <ni^ h05 nOT b6611 dble to compieTe rhe iry af the extended oeriod and the today. for the Darties. insei for the resoective oarties, lost date of submission of the tender (ed time for comaletion of work was and therefore, respondent No,2 was It-ender form to the oetitioner on the |d not complete ecrlier works allott-ed No.2 wjthin time and amount. initiated by resoondent No.2 ^q Tender dated 6.11.2007 (Annexure |ig tender form to the petitioner and l|>y quashing. However, it shall be open |Council, Tilda NevKTto initiate fresh Iwith rules. reso4ndent Drdceedina Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge IHHrftT^itligaillRRTlM-fK'li'l—FS/95—11/2008—1,00,000. :v.