AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
Petitioner responded to a Notice Inviting Tender issued by respondent No. 2 on 07.07.2023. According to him, there were five bidders, out of which only two bidders were declared to be technically responsive, including the petitioner.
Grievance raised by the petitioner is that earlier his bid was declared to be responsive but later it was declared as non responsive. The decision to treat his bid as non-responsive has been put to challenge in this writ petition.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, submits that petitioner has made representation against the decision taken by the Competent Authority, which is impugned in this writ petition, and he assures that decision on petitioner’s representation shall be taken within five days from today. He further assures the Court that till decision is taken on petitioner’s representation, financial bid of any bidder shall not opened.
We, accordingly, dispose of this writ petition by taking the statement made by Mr. S.S. Chauhan on record.
It shall be open to the petitioner to approach this Court, in case the decision on his representation goes against him.