Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - (1.) The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the following prayers have been made:- (i) for quashing the decision of the tendering authority of the respondent Central Coalfields Limited (in short C.C.L.) contained in e-mail dated 03.12.2018 (Annexure4), whereby and whereunder the bid of the petitioner has been rejected for the tender invited vide NIT No.CCL/GM(CMC)/Dhori/2018/27 dated 18.06.2018 in respect of the work "Loading and transportation of coal from AAD-OCM Surface Stock yard heap No.7 to feeder breaker of Dhori Siding for a period of 2 years in Dhori area", only with a reason that "Being Technically Not Eligible Bidder", without assigning any reason. (ii) direct the respondents to treat the bid of the petitioner as technically qualified and to issue Letter of Acceptance, Work Order and to give work order pertaining to the aforesaid tender. (iii) to stay the operation of the Letter of Acceptance being reference No. CCL / GM (CMC) / Dhori / 2018 / NIT27 / 1581 dated 03.12.2018.
(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner as per the pleadings made in the writ petition is that the respondent No.1-C.C.L., by publishing an e-tender notification being NIT No.CCL/GM(CMC)/Dhori/2018/27 in respect of the work "Loading and transportation of Coal from AAD-OCM Surface Stock yard heap No.7 to feeder breaker of Dhori Siding for a period of two years in Dhori Area", mentioning therein the reason only as "Being Technically Not eligible Bidder", along with the detail bidding document and uploading on the website of the respondent No.1 containing therein necessary eligibility criteria for participating in the bid.
(3.) The petitioner having qualified in all respects has participated in the bid by submitting the relevant documents through e-tender process but to utmost surprise to him, his bid has been cancelled without assigning any reason and as such the instant writ petition has been filed on the following grounds. (i) the impugned decision of the e-tender committee is without assigning any reason and as such the order aforesaid is nonspeaking. (ii) the petitioner submitted all relevant documents as required in terms of the tender condition but has not rightly been appreciated by the authorities and as such there is no application of mind and with ulterior motive, it has been rejected by the tendering committee at the stage of the technical scrutiny of the document. (iii) although in the counter affidavit several grounds have been taken justifying the reason of rejection of the bid but that is not to be taken into consideration by this Court on the principle of settled position of law with the reason which has not been assigned in the impugned decision, cannot be allowed to be improved by way of affidavit.;