A.K.MATHUR, J. - (1.) PETITIONER by this writ petition has prayed that it may be declared that tender of respondent No. 3 is not eligible to be considered and respondent State and the Excise Commissioner should be directed not to consider the tender of respondent No. 3 any they should consider the tender of petitioner being the highest bidder for the grant of licence of Nagaur Merta Group for exclusive privilege of Foreign liquor.
(2.) THE applications for grant of licence for vending Liquor was invited on 4.2.93 on the conditions set out in the tender form. The licence was to be granted for both whole sale and retail in respect of Nagaur Merta Group. The bid for Rs. 4,53,00,000/ -offered by the petitioner was the second highest. The respondent Son Singh Manoj Kumar and party also submitted their tender and offered highest bid but since one of the co -tenderer of this group was licence (Manoj Kumar) in the name of Dharampal and party which included Manoj Kumar and against that about Rs. 32,00,000/ - remains to be unpaid, therefore, it is submitted that by virtue of Clause 15 of the Tender Conditions (Annex. 1), the respondent cannot be considered for the grant of a licence of liquor for the aforesaid area. An affidavit of the Officer -in -charge has been filed on behalf of the State and Commissioner and in that it has been mentioned that the amount due has been deposited on behalf of the licencees of the Alwar Group for 1992 -93 and as well as of the respondents. Mr. Mridul, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of the Clause 15, if any money is due from any of the tenderer then that their tender cannot be considered and that should be rejected. The Clause 15 reads as under: .........[vernacular ommited text]........... According to this clause, is any dues of the Excise Department or if he is disqualified for any other reasons then he will not eligible and his tender shall not be considered. Likewise that for 1992 -93 if any money is due from the tender and same has not been paid by December, 1992 then his tender can be rejected. In the present case, Respondent was one of the co -tender was licencee for the Alwar Group and against that party, there were excise dues as mentioned above. Therefore, learned Counsel submitted that respondent though highest bidder is ineligible.
(3.) MR . Mridul, learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to 1979 SC 1628 and 1987 SC 537 in support of the contention that if any guidelines have been laid down by the administrative authorities then they are bound to abide by it and they cannot make a departure.;