Sanjay Kishan Kaul, C.J. - (1.) WE have heard learned counsels for the parties.
(2.) WE may note at the inception that learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners on instructions withdraws the allegation of bias or malafides against the respondents. The controversy is in a very narrow compass i.e. that the two petitioners, who formed the JV for submitting the bid in the ratio of 51:49, did not satisfy the financial parameters on account of the fact that petitioner No. 2 could not satisfy the same for a period of 49 days. This is what persuaded the petitioner to suggest that since a different ratio is also permissible, they would change the same to 70:30 in which eventuality again there is no dispute that the petitioners would qualify. The initial bid could also have been made in these terms.
(3.) THE only controversy raised by the respondents is that this would amount to making certain changes in the bid and as to whether such a course of action is permissible or not.;