AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 239 wordsPursuant to our last order dated 5th October 2019, an affidavit dated 9th October 2019 has been filed by the respondent under the signatures of Sajad Naquib, Executive Engineer, Police Construction Division, PHQ, J&K Srinagar to the effect that no ineligible person/bidder was declared responsive in the technical evaluation.
We find from the perusal of the record of the case that the appellant before us had laid a specific challenge to the effect that respondent No. 4 was ineligible and yet had been permitted to participate in the technical bid.
On 5th October 2019, we were informed that the respondent No. 4 was found to be L3 and no work has been allotted to respondent No. 4 for the reason that he was L3 in the bidding.
In view of the affidavit filed by Mr. Sajad Naquib, Executive Engineer, it is clear that respondent No. 4 was eligible and therefore had been permitted to participate in the bidding.
The challenge made by the appellant to the selection and award of contract pursuant to e-NIT dated 23rd August 2019 inviting e-tenders for construction of Pre-Fabricated structures at various locations for accommodation of CAPF by way of a writ petition bearing WP (C) No. 2829/2019 had therefore been rightly rejected by the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment dated 18th September 2019.
There is no merit in the appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.
