- (1.) We have heard on the review petition, filed and pressed by Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Additional Advocate General, appearing for the Jaipur Development Authority(JDA).
(2.) The JDA has sought review of our judgment dated 25.03.2015, on the ground that from the letter dated 16.04.2015 and its enclosures, it is clear that the plea to the effect that incorrect document was sent by the complainant for verification from the NHAI, instead of the document submitted by the appellant in the tender document for appointment of independent Engineer, is factually incorrect and misleading. The judgment has been secured by mis-statement of the facts, and thus, deserves to be reviewed and recalled.
(3.) It is stated that the original bid document was manipulated, so as to remove the documents actually submitted at page Nos. 596 and 624 of the bid document, and were replaced by another document, prior to submission of the record before the Court for perusal, with a view to support the plea to the effect that the complainant's document was sent for verification and not the documents enclosed with the bid.;