Ramendra Jain, J. - (1.) Krishan Kumar has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the action of respondents No.1 and 2, recommending the names of respondents No.3 to 5 vide recommendation dated 06.06.2016 (Annexure P-4), for allotment of six tenders in terms of the advertisement dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure P-2). Further prayer has been made to quash clause 8 of general terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 10.05.2016. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 and 2 to allot the tenders to him, being the lowest bidder.
(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that in terms of advertisement dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure P-2) issued by respondents No.1 and 2, he applied for all the six tenders of outsourcing various services in different departments of the respondent University. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the fact that he was the lowest bidder for all the six tenders, respondents No.1 and 2 recommended the names of respondents No.3 to 5 for allotment of all the six tenders.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the petitioner was the lowest bidder for all the six tenders, yet vide recommendation dated 06.06.2016 (Annexure P-4), his name was not recommended even for a single tender. In the said recommendation, no reason has been assigned to reject the name of the petitioner. Learned counsel further contends that clause 8 of the general terms and conditions of the advertisement dated 10.05.2016 is illegal and arbitrary.;