- (1.) After hearing Mr. Sinha, learned Sr. Advocate at length with regard to the various points involved in this case and the learned Advocate General, we found that the controversy forming the subject matter of this appeal can be amicably sorted out by setting aside prospectively the award of contract in favour of the respondent No. 3, but without going into the merits of any controversial question leading to the grant of such award and by directing respondent No. 2 to invite the highest bid afresh from the four parties who had submitted the bids originally so as to obtain the maximum revenue for the State. Undoubtedly, while arriving at this conclusion, we have been influenced by the fact that the invitation for the highest bid shall now be based only with respect to the actual amount being offered by the bidders, and not by grant of any concession to respondent No. 3 under any Rule or Order and in any manner whatsoever.
(2.) With this in view, we dispose of this appeal with the consent of the parties and by their agreement and while passing the following order, issue hereinbelow mentioned directions:-- (i) On 31st January, 2001, at 11.00 a.m. there shall be a meeting in the Chamber of the respondent No. 2 wherein the four highest bidders, namely, the appellant, respondent No. 3, Mohendi Ansary and Aman Construction, shall be present. As far as appellant and respondent No. 3 are concerned, this, order is being communicated to them through their learned counsel appearing in the Court today itself. As far as the other two parties are concerned, counsel for respondent No. 1 shall ensure, in consultation with the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent No. 3 that he sends to respondent No. 2 their complete particulars latest by 12.00 noon tomorrow (25.1.2001). On receipt of such particulars, respondent No. 2 shall ensure that notices are issued to them and have these served on them positively by 27th, January, 2001. In addition to this, at the expense of the appellant, a notice shall be got published in the 'Hindustan Times', Ranchi, addressed to the aforesaid two parties to be present in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, at 11.00 a.m. on 31st Jan., 2001 to take part in the renewed auction for the contract in question. If despite the aforesaid two steps being taken, these two parties do not present themselves on the aforesaid date and time, respondent No. 2 shall go ahead with the re-auction in their absence and in presence of the two parties, i.e. appellant and the respondent No. 3. If either of the aforesaid parties is also absence, respondent No. 2 shall go ahead and take decision in the presence of the party who is present on that date. (ii) Respondent No. 2 shall, through a negotiated process, invite the parties to offer their highest bids for the settlement of the contract in question for the period ending 31st. Dec., 2001. starting from 1st. Feb.. 2001. The offer of the highest bidder shall be accepted and the acceptance recorded on the spot. The highest bidder shall be asked to deposit the amount as conditioner the acceptance of the highest bid in terms of the tender notice within 24 hours from the lime of acceptance of the bid and failure to do so shall entail the consequences as mentioned in the tender notice. Based on that, the contract shall be awarded to the highest bidder. If the highest bidder fails to deposit the aforesaid amount within 24 hours, the arrangement already existing with reference to the awarding of the contract in favour of the respondent No. 3 shall continue as here to before.
(3.) Even though, this appeal is being disposed of, we give liberty to the parties to mention to us if they face any difficulty in the implementation of this order.;