(1.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the paper-book.
(2.) IN this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge Instruction No. 9 contained in Endorsement No. 13796-895 dated October 6, 2004 in the rate contract dated October 6, 2004 (Annexure P-6), as ultra vires the Constitution of India and the terms and conditions of the notice Inviting Tender No. 7/2003/2004, as also of the rate contract.
(3.) IS the action of the State of Punjab in consonance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court is the significant question which arises in this writ petition. As the controversy revolves around the interpretation of NIT and the rate contract, the facts need to be noticed, but briefly.