- (1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the 5th respondent was permitted by the authorities to submit his tender papers on February 21, 2005, when in terms of the notice inviting tender dated January 18, 2005 last date of receiving tender papers had been fixed for February 18, 2005 (up to 3 p.m.).
(2.) Advocate for the petitioner says that once the schedule of the tender process had been duly prescribed and notified, the authorities were not empowered or entitled to permit the 5th respondent to submit his tender papers after the date for submitting them expired. He says that explanations given by the authorities in their opposition are not acceptable at all, and they rather show that the authorities acted mala fide for permitting the 5th respondent to submit the tender papers after the date fixed for the purpose was over.
(3.) Advocate for the authorities refers me to the case made out in the opposition. It has been stated in the opposition that on February 18, 2005 the 5th respondent was obstructed by certain persons when he visited the office concerned for submitting the tender papers. It has further been stated that on the basis of the complaint lodged by the 5th respondent, the authorities conducted an enquiry and found that allegations made by him were correct; and in view of the findings of the enquiry made on the basis of the complaint submitted by the 5th respondent, the authorities decided to permit the 5th respondent to participate in the tender process along with the other tenderers, including the petitioner, by submitting the tender papers, which the 5th respondent had duly purchased within the date mentioned in the notice inviting tender.;