- (1.) HEARD the parties. Bulaki Ram Versus Jatru Mahali
(2.) PETITIONER prays for quashing the decision of the Tender Committee dated 31.5.2004 whereby and whereunder respondent No. 7 has been awarded the work. Petitioner 'scase is that work - has been awarded in arbitrary and illegal manner; violating the policy and circulars, only to favour respondent No. 7. Petitioner 'sfurther case is that priority is to be given to the tenderer having experience of similar work. Moreover a local tenderer is to begiven priority, if other matters are identical. It is submitted that petitioner fulfilled all the criteria including the aforesaid criteria of having experience of similar work and of being a local contractor. It is further submitted that petitioner is senior to respondent No.7 as per the seniority list maintained by the Department.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of A.B.L. International Ltd. and another V/s. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. and Others (2004) 3 SCC 553 and submitted that in an appropriate case, writ Court can go into the disputed facts and the evidences if it is satisfied that the impugned action is arbitrary.;