- (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) Petitioners have prayed for quashing the letter dated 6-5-2004 issued by the Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization, Ranchi whereby work order for the construction of road has been allotted to respondent No. 6.
(3.) Pursuant to Short Tender Notice No. 01/04 issued by the Executive Engineer, REO, Work Circle, Ranchi, petitioners along with others submitted their respective tenders. After completion of the process of the said tender, a comparative statement of the work was prepared. The Executive Engineer recommended the case of the petitioners and respondent No. 6 for allotment of work. The Superintending Engineer also sent recommendation for allotment of work to the petitioners and respondent No. 6 but the Chief Engineer approved the tender only in favour of respondent No. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners assailed the impugned allotment made by the Chief Engineer in favour of respondent No. 6 only as being illegal, arbitrary and whimsical. According to learned counsel, when the Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer recommended for allotment of work to all the three contractors, namely, the petitioners and respondent No. 6 then the Chief Engineer ought not to have allotted the work to respondent No. 6 only.;