S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has challenged the notice dated 20th May, 2002 published in newspaper, whereby the respondents intimated the works allotted in favour of one or other contractor in pursuance of Tender Notice published in the newspaper on 8th March, 2002.
(2.) THE case relates to Package No, JH -0502 for construction of road under PRADHAN MANTRI GRAMIN SARAK PARTYOJNA. According to the petitioner in pursuance of Tender Notice dated 8th March, 2002 published in the newspaper HINDUSTAN, it submitted tender papers for Package No. JH -0502, as mentioned at Sl. No. 52" of the Tender Notice. The tender was opened on 27th March, 2002 and the petitioner was found the lowest tenderer (L -1 for short). The 6th respondent, M/s. B.N. Engineering Works, Deoghar was the second lowest tenderer (L -2 for short). Subsequently, notice was published by the Engineer -in -Chief, by which the petitioner was directed to appear for negotiation on 6th May, 2002. All on a sudden, after some negotiation, the respondents published the impugned Press Notice dated 20th May, 2002. whereby the Package No. JH -0502 has been bifurcated and distributed amongst two tenderers i,e. petitioner and the 6th respondent.
(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid action is violative of Clause 12 of the notice inviting tender, as also the guidelines framed by the State. According to him, there is no provision to bifurcate a package in two parts and to allot the work order in favour of two tenderers. It was also submitted that the 6th respondent being the second lowest tenderer, there is no occasion to allot approximately 2/3rd work to him and 1/3 work to petitioner, who is the lowest tenderer.;