ADVOCATE ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2012-2-118
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on February 01,2012

ADVOCATE ASSOCIATION Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE learned Advocate General has produced the copy of the recommendation given by the Executive Engineer, Building Construction Department, Building Division No.1, Ranchi dated 27th January, 2012 suggesting the terms and conditions for inviting tenders of eligible parties for providing the Consulting Services which includes : - "1. Landscaping development of land.
(2.) PLANNING for layout of High Court Buildings for all least 30 courts and other staff and Residential Bungalows for Hon'ble Chief Justice and Hon'ble Judges of the High Court and other staff. Architectural drawings for High Court Building, Judges Bungalows and Staff quarters with all necessary required amenities viz. Centrally Air conditioning, Lift, ,Internal -External Electrification, Internal Road Network, Water supply etc. The firms must include in their Expression of Interest the following information : - 1.General and overall experience. 2. Experience of working in similar Geographical region of Countries. 3. Annual turn over for the last five years. 4. Nature, Cost per month input employer, location and the field of input for work in hand. 5. Experience in the required area of expertise. 6. Summary of permanent professional employees and resources persons etc.  2. In our opinion, some benchmark of turnover be fixed so that unnecessary applicants may not apply only for the purpose of increasing the number of eligible candidates. The annual turn over of last year may also be quantified so that the applicant may also be asked to submit the specific certificate of the completion of their projects with the total amount of the project completed by them as well as certificate of completion work in time. The Government has already included the summary of permanent professional employees and resources persons, to be disclosed by the applicants. These suggestions, which we are giving with themselves, are not only the required criteria and we expect that the government at the highest level will look into this aspect and make appropriate and adequate provisions in the tender condition itself so that the government may get the best consultant for the above advice. 3. The learned Advocate General has prayed for two weeks' time but we do not find any reason for granting two weeks time .Under such circumstances, preliminary exercise is to be done by the government which is normal for any government or for any consultant activity of high value. Therefore, we expect that the Government will exercise and inform the High Court about the criteria laid down so that next steps may be taken. Therefore, put up this case on 9th February, 2012.
(3.) ONE map of the proposed High Court Complex Ranchi has been submitted by the learned Advocate General, which is taken on record for consideration by the High Court.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.