ASHOK SHARMA Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The advocate for the respondents waives service.

(2.) THE petitioners by the present petition seek to quash and set aside the decision of the respondent No. 1 rejecting the offer of the petitioners in response to the tender for sole/bulk rights for commercial publicity over the suburban section of Mumbai Division, as also the decision to forfeit the earnest money deposited by the petitioners and for further direction to accept the licence fees from the petitioners only in respect of the area which is actually available for marketing on pro rata basis with reference to the entire area which is the subject-matter of the tender.

(3.) IN or about November, 2007 the respondent No. 1 invited bids for awarding sole/ bulk rights for commercial publicity over the entire suburban section of Mumbai Division between Churchgate and Dahanu road Stations. At that time various advertising sites at various stations were already the subject-matter of different contracts, some of which were to expire in 2012. However, such contracts are not subject to renewals and the sites occupied by those contractors would be handed over to the successful bidder as and when the respective contracts would expire. The tender documents required the bid to include the rent for the entire area in the sector, to be quoted on yearly basis, for the first year with annual increments as specified in the tender form. The petitioners offered their bid for the sole/bulk rights for the year which was to commence 120 days after the letter of acceptance and the contract was to remain in force for a period of five years with the increase of rent at the agreed percentage. The petitioners' bid was accepted by the respondents under the letter dated 31-3-2008 and the petitioners were called upon to pay six months' licence fees in advance after adjusting the earnest money deposited with the respondents. Under the letter dated 10-4-2008 the petitioners acknowledged the receipt of the letter dated 31-3-2008 but expressed their inability to enter into such contract on the ground that the letter was silent regarding the details of the space availability as on the date and that would be available during the current year. The petitioners also requested the respondents to provide information regarding the space availability as per the format which was given by the petitioner further informing that in the absence of such data, it would be difficult for the petitioners to go ahead with the project since there were too many contractors with simultaneous activities of commercial publicity at various sites over the entire suburban section covered in the said contract and that the contract involved huge investment for which advance data of availability of space was must for allocation of funds and marketing. In the letter it was specifically stated that: "we hereby place our inability to accept the same as an offer letter in terms of Clause 7. 4 of the terms and conditions of the tender conditions of the said contract. "