- (1.) Mr. M.S. Mittal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner's technical bid was rejected by the respondents on the ground that the bid was given in the name of "National Printers, Proprietor Apex Products Private Limited", though petitioner furnished all the documents with the same nomenclature. Now the respondents have issued NIT No. 52 of 2010 (Annexure 15) in which tomorrow i.e. 7.8.2010 is the last date for giving tender. He further submitted that the petitioner has taken part in tender of other departments also with the same nomenclature and the same has been accepted; and that the respondents have also accepted the tender with the same nomenclature in respect of N.I.T. No. 96 of 2009, but the petitioner apprehends that on the ground of nomenclature, the petitioner's technical bid may be rejected.
(2.) Mr. M.S. Anwar, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 5807 of 2009 is pending before other Bench in which also, the said issue is involved.
(3.) On this, Mr. Mittal, submitted that in that case, the petitioner's technical bid was rejected on several grounds including the ground of nomenclature; and that thereafter the petitioner has got the memorandum of association amended to the effect that 'Apex Products Private Limited' can participate in tender and enter into contract in the name and style of "National Printers, Proprietor Apex Products Private Limited", and now in view of the changed situation, the petitioner's technical bid may not be rejected on the ground that the petitioner has applied with the said nomenclature. He lastly submitted that as the "National Printers" had reputation and goodwill and, therefore, the 'Proprietor Apex Product Private Limited' wishes to carry the said name in the tender/contracts.;