- (1.) On the basis of the chart given in the minutes of the proceeding dated 20th April, 2006 (Annexure 2), it is contended that even though the appellant quoted Rs. 90,06,330. 32, less than the ceiling rate, his tender has been rejected and, as such, the order rejecting tender is illegal.
(2.) When this point was urged before the learned Single Judge, the same was considered on the basis of the records and also on the basis of the statements made on behalf of the parties. The learned Single Judge stated that in public auction while dealing with the tenders, the State is entitled to look for the best deal and for that it can even refuse to accept the highest bid, but while rejecting, it must record reasons. The reasons given for rejection, in our view, is valid especially when the minutes proceeding gave two reasons: (i) it is less than 15% from the ceiling rate; and (ii) the Corporation felt that in spite of increase of petrol and diesel price as well as fare of trucks along with other expenses and, as such, the rate quoted by the appellant is impractical to work on lesser rate and, hence the rate quoted by the appellant was rejected as the same was impractical and unworkable.
(3.) Since the reasons given by the Corporation while rejecting the tender which was below the ceiling limit appears to be fully justified, the same was accepted by the learned Single Judge and, accordingly, dismissed the writ petition. Challenging the said order of the learned Single Judge, this Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the appellant.;