Gopal Krishan Vyas, J. - (1.) BY way of filing the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner -firm is challenging the order dated 8.8.2008 Annexure -13 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in Civil Case No. 214/2008 whereby the trial Court decided the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of CPC filed by the respondent No. 4 - EMKAY Medicare Services, so also the order dated 12.2.2009 passed by District Judge, Bikaner in appeal No. 92/2008 filed by the petitioner -firm against the order dated 8.8.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 invited tendered for package of diagnostic machines to install at PBM Hospital, Bikaner pertaining to MRI Machine and CT Scan Machine. The petitioner along with certain other persons and private respondent No. 4 submitted their tenders. The first tender notice was issued on 29.2.2008. Thereafter, a corrigendum was issued on 24.4.2008 whereby dates were extended and fresh bidders were also granted opportunity to file their bids, so also, an opportunity was given to the old bidders to make fresh bids in case they did not submit bid. The petitioner's case is that new technical and financial bid was submitted by him and on consideration of the applications, the petitioner was declared the lowest bidder and firm - Indiana Nuclear Med. Centre was 5 declared second lowest bidder and respondent No. 4 - EMKAY Medicare Services was declared the third lowest bidder. Therefore, the petitioner was called for negotiation and finalization. After negotiation, the competent authority gave counter offer vide letter dated 24.6.2008. As per the petitioner, he has accepted the counter offer. The private respondent preferred a suit in which it was prayed that the plaintiff may also be called for negotiation and all the work of the tender should be assigned to him. Learned trial Court passed a temporary injunction on 8.8.2008 whereby a conclusion was given that the petitioner who was impleaded as respondent No. 4 in the suit did not submit valid tenders, therefore, the respondent should continue with the tender process while excluding the tenders of M/s Ganpati Diagnostic Centre (petitioner) and the petitioner immediately preferred an appeal against the said order. However, the appellate Court vide order dated 12.2.2009 dismissed the appeal and further ordered the concerned authorities to consider the respondent No. 4 ACME Medicare Services in the tender process and assigned the work to the respondent No. 4 because his bid is lowest in the tender.
(3.) THE petitioner by way of filing the present writ petition is challenging both the orders on various grounds under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.;