Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This mandamus appeal is directed against an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 22nd September, 2017 in W.P. 25067(W) of 2017 at the instance of the writ petitioner/appellant. The writ petitioner/appellant participated in the tender process. He was found to be the lowest tenderer. However, the said tender process was cancelled as even the lowest tenderer quoted a very high price for supply of the articles as mentioned in the notice inviting tender against serial No.14. Subsequently re- tender process was started. The writ petitioner/appellant filed the writ petition challenging cancellation of the tender process in which he was found to be the lowest tenderer.
(2.) Having regard to the fact that the fresh tender process had already been initiated by the concerned respondent, the learned Trial Judge permitted the writ petitioner to participate in the fresh tender process without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the writ petition. Direction was given for filing affidavits by the parties in the said writ petition. Since interim order stalling the fresh tender process was not granted by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the writ petitioner/appellant felt aggrieved. As such, he has filed the instant mandamus appeal.
(3.) We are informed by Mr. Banerjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the State-respondents that though liberty was given to the writ petitioner/appellant to participate in the fresh tender process without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the writ petition, the writ petitioner/appellant did not participate in the fresh tender process. We have also been informed by Mr. Banerjee that the work order has already been issued to the successful tenderer in the fresh tender process.;