Sanjib Banerjee, J. - (1.) The petitioner firm complains of arbitrary conduct on the part of the State in arresting the writ petitioner's due progress to the commercial leg of the bid following a notice inviting tender. The petitioner says that the petitioner was eminently eligible to enter the commercial stage as the petitioner met both the working capital and the bid capacity requirements that the tender documents called for.
(2.) It is the admitted position that the relevant forms that had been submitted by the petitioner were left blank in respect of the working capital and bid capacity figures. The petitioner, however, appended documents in support of its working capital credentials without specifying the extent of its working capital. The petitioner had also relied on bank documents in support of the bid and certificates issued by other organisations that had earlier availed of the petitioner's services, to demonstrate that the petitioner had the requisite capacity to take up the work of such magnitude.
(3.) Upon receipt of the petitioner's bid, the respondent authorities referred the petitioner's papers to a chartered accountant and the chartered accountant was of the opinion that the petitioner did not meet the eligibility criteria that had been specified in the tender documents. It is the opinion of the chartered accountant disclosed in the State's affidavit that has been sought to be assailed.;