Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) THIS petition has been filed by petitioner M/s. Shree Mangi Lal Bishnoi through its Partner Amar Chand Bishnoi, which is a partnership firm and is also registered as "AA" class Government contractor in Public Health and Engineering Department as well as Irrigation Department of the Government of Rajasthan. Petitioner firm is having vast experience of carrying out work of drilling, installation of Single Phase Submersible Motor Pump Set etc., supply and execution of DI pipers, construction of tube well, CWR, OHSR etc. as well as other works relating to water supply of PHED on contract basis. Petitioner is aggrieved by Clause no. 4, which details out pre -qualification criteria contending that required work experience with the respondents should be in conformity with the description of work. Shri Anand Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner, has referred to condition no. 2 of the detailed notice inviting tenders for works, where description of the work has been given as construction of 250 mm dia Tube Well complete on Annual Rate Contract basis in alluvium strata with casing pipe of 250 mm AC pipe including O & M period of five year in urban/rural area of District Bharatpur. It is contended that this criteria was in fact laid down on the basis of recommendations of the Finance Committee Meeting: 613/06.04.2011. Now the respondents have relaxed the experience criteria to make others eligible who have had no experience of installing of AC pipes of 250 mm diameter in alluvium strata. The experience criteria should always be based on execution of similar work by intending tenderer and therefore the respondents have not strictly adhered to the recommendations of the Finance Committee. Petitioner earlier also approached this court by filing Writ Petition No. 13520/2012 - M/s. Shree Mangi Lal Bishnoi Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Others, which was decided by a coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 17.09.2012. In that writ petition prayer was made that the eligibility criteria mentioned in the NIT No. 20/2012 -13 issued by respondent no. 3 the Additional Chief Engineer, Public Health and Engineering Department, Region Bharatpur, be declared to be arbitrary and illegal as it is contrary to the decision of the Finance Committee of the Rajasthan Waster Supply and Sewerage Management Board taken on 06.04.2011. This court therein declined to interfere with the tender process and grant relief sought for. However, petitioner was granted liberty to make a representation to the Principal Secretary, Public Health and Engineering Department. On receiving representation of petitioner, instead of making any changes in earlier tender conditions, the respondents cancelled the NIT No. 20/2012 -13. Thereafter, now the respondents have again issued another NIT No. 30/2012 -13 for the same work of construction of 250 mm diameter tube well. New criteria requires that a bider should have successfully completed and commissioned, during any one financial year in the period of last five financial year and current financial period up to date of submission of tender, the work of construction and commissioning of tube well of minimum 200 mm diameter including supply and installation of submersible pump sets etc., amounting to minimum 1/3rd of the total cost of work i.e. 73.33 lacs. In response to clarification sought by the court, learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has qualified the technical bid and financial bid is yet to be opened.
(2.) ON hearing learned counsel for petitioner and perusing material on record, I find that pre -qualification criteria for the work of construction and commissioning of tube well of minimum 200 mm diameter, has been laid down by the respondents in Clause No. 4 of the NIT. If the respondents have decided to lay down the criteria that bidders should have successfully completed and commissioned, during any one financial year in the period of last five financial year and current financial period upto the date of submission of tender, the work of construction and commissioning of tube well of minimum 200mm diameter including supply and installation of submersible pump -sets etc. amounting to minimum 1/3rd of the total cost of work, this court cannot enter into the domain of the respondents authorities to substitute that condition by insisting that they should have laid a criteria suggested by the Finance Committee in its recommendations dated 06.04.2011. Petitioner has qualified the technical bid. What in fact the petitioner wants is that while he continues to remain eligible, the others, who, by virtue of aforesaid qualification criteria, have become eligible to participate in the process, should be excluded from the tender process, which would mean that zone of competition would be somewhat restricted and reduced, thus enhancing the probability of the contract being awarded to the petitioner. The petition obviously has been filed with an oblique motive because otherwise the petitioner is not adversely hit by any of the aforesaid conditions. As it is, the technical bids have been opened and financial bids are to be opened. As per law laid down by the Supreme Court in Tata Cellular Vs. Union of India - : (1994) 6 SCC 651, the scope of interference by the High Court in matters of eligibility criteria for award of a contract is rather limited. I do not find any merit in this writ petition and same is hereby dismissed. Consequent upon dismissal of writ petition, stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and same is also dismissed.;