- (1.) All these three writ petitions were heard together. The first two writ petitions are concerned with identical issues and insofar as the third writ petition is concerned the questions raised are a little different. Since in the first two writ petitions same questions are involved, they are taken up first.
(2.) In Re : Din Mohammad - The case of the writ petitioner is that pursuant to a tender notice dated 9-6-2000 the petitioner submitted a tender for supply of dietary articles for the Indoor patients of the Hospital with 1890 beds for the period from 1st July, 2000 to 31st March, 2001 or any further period extended by the appropriate authority. Along with the said tender a schedule of rates for different articles have also been appended.
(3.) From the perusal of the schedule it will appear that the tender is invited in respect of various food items. The writ petitioner also asserts that he is an existing supplier. The main grievance of the writ petitioner is that even though the petitioner has submitted his tender complying with all the formalities under the tender notice but his tender has not been considered in view of a resolution which was taken by the respondent No. 1 on or about 23-6-2000 to the effect that tender filed below 10% of the scheduled rates will not be considered. Similarly, it was decided that tenders filed above 10% of the scheduled rates will not be considered.;