1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Excise, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited (CSMCL), Excise Building, Fourth Floor, Chokra Nala, Labhandi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Rohit Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Shri Siddharth Dubey, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge C A V Order Per Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the eligibility criteria prescribed by RespondentChhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent 2 CSMCL) in the "tender for appointment of Chartered Accountants Firms for assignment of internal audit of retail vending liquor shops", of which, the Petitioner became ineligible to participate in the tender proceedings. 2. Relevant facts for disposal of this writ petition are that, the RespondentCSMCL had issued tender notification dated 24.10.2019 and the last date for submission of tender document was fixed as 05.11.2019. The Petitioner who is a partnership Firm has challenged the eligibility criteria as mentioned in Clause2.1 of the tender notification on various grounds. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner is that RespondentCSMCL has earlier floated tenders, which were cancelled for one or the other reason and again under the same condition i.e. eligibility criteria, present tender notification bearing No.CSMC/Tender/201920/2E has been floated. Experience clause as mentioned in Clause 2.1 is framed in a manner to extend the benefit to the Chartered Accountants Firms already engaged previously with RespondentCSMCL. The action of RespondentCSMCL is violative to Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and cancellation of earlier tenders is deliberate attempt and foul play to achieve hidden objects. The eligibility criteria prescribed in the tender notification is violative to the directions issued by the Central Vigilance Commission. It is further pointed that the tender notification, in which, the Petitioner became successful was cancelled and 3 thereafter, insertion of clause in eligibility criteria i.e. Clause 2.1 is an arbitrary exercise by RespondentCSMCL to oust the tenderer like Petitioner from the competition. The date of publication of the notification is in a planed way during the period of Diwali festival, therefore, the action on the part of RespondentCSMCL is arbitrary with foul play and an eye wash. 4. Learned counsel for the RespondentCSMCL submitted return and denied all the adverse pleadings and allegations made in the writ petition. It is pointed out that the experience clause as mentioned in Clause 2.1 of the tender notification is only on account of fact that the RespondentCSMCL was borne in the year 2017 itself, earlier the liquors are being sold by qualified liquor contractors who become successful in the bid proceedings. In the year 2017, a new taxation law has been incorporated and came into force known as 'Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which made the taxation law applicable in the work, for which, the RespondentCSMCL has floated tender notification. Fixing of eligibility criteria is in the domain of the employer as per his need and requirement. It is also pointed out that it is the employer who is the best person to know and assess the eligibility and qualification of a person or Firm looking to the nature of work, for which, the tender has bee