High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 11 UK CK 0091

Suresh Chandra and Another vs State and Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 30 November 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Brahma Singh Verma, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 2024 of 2010

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 503 words

B.S. Verma, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By means of this petition, the Petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 03.11.2010 and 04.11.2010, passed by Respondent No. 3. A further writ in the nature of mandamus has been sought commanding the Zila Panchayat, Haridwar to complete the process initiated vide publication dated 03.11.2010 within the shortest possible time.

3.

The grievance of the Petitioner is that the impugned orders have been passed by Respondent No. 3 without competence. Learned Senior Advocate has vehemently argued that before passing of the impugned orders, the tender notice was invited by Respondent No. 2 for carrying out civil works under Zila Panchayat Haridwar. Thereafter, the Petitioner purchased the tender. At this stage, District Magistrate, passed the impugned order by getting it published in "Amar Ujala", "Dainik Jagran", "Hindustan" and others.

3.

Learned Senior Advocate further submits that Zila Panchayat is an independent body and Self Government as per 73rd Amendment of the Constitution of India. The State Government has no control in carrying out the works of the Zila Panchayat. Even otherwise in Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Samitis and Zila Parishads Works Rules, 1984, there is no provision empowering the State Government to cancel the work order. It is only the Zila Panchayat, which can cancel the tenders, if any irregularity comes to its notice subsequently. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel that the tender notice was published in the local newspaper "Dainik Badri Vishal" and said newspaper is on the approved list of the State Government. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to Rule 19 of Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Samitis and Zila Parishads Works Rules, 1984.

4.

I have perused the record. Rule 19 of the Rules deals with the provision of inviting tenders, which provides that no contract for executing of a work estimated to cost more than Rs. 5,000/- shall be given until sealed tenders for the contract, accompanied by earnest money to the amount fixed by proper authority, have been invited by public notice, which should be published by insertion in one or more local newspapers as the Mukhya Adhikari or Khand Vikas Adhikari, as the case may be, thinks fit and by pasting copies thereof at conspicuous places at the office of the Parishad or Kshettra Samiti, the Collector''s Office, the court of the District Judge or the court of every Additional District Judge, and Munsif, if the office of District Judge is not situate, the headquarter of every tehsil, local offices of the Public Works Department (Building and Road), Irrigation Department and Local Self Government Engineering Department.

5.

Admit the petition.

6.

The Respondents may file counter affidavit within a period of three weeks.

7.

List in the week commencing 27.12.2010.

8.

Till the next date of listing, operation of the impugned orders shall remain stayed. Tender process may go on but the tender should not be opened till the next date of listing.