C.W.P No. 15470 of 2008 ::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P No. 15470 of 2008
Date of decision : October 15, 2008
Jaskaran Singh
...... Petitioner
through Mr.S.C.Arora, Advocate
v.
Secretary, Department of Irrigation, Govt. of Punjab & others,
...... Respondents
through Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, AAG Punjab
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
***
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?
***
AJAY TEWARI, J
This writ petition has been filed to quash the tender notice
dated 11.8.2008 on the allegation that by this tender distinct and separate
works have been illegally consolidated into one tender so as to oust small
contractors like the petitioner and to allot work to favourite persons.
A perusal of the tender notice (Annexure P-1) shows that the
entire work pertaining to one drain has been consolidated into one tender. It
is alleged that this tender is against the provisions of the PWD code.
In reply, the respondents have relied upon the minutes of the
meeting of State level coordination committee held on 14.2.2008 to
consider anti-water logging project of Gidderbaha Drainage Circle, attended
C.W.P No. 15470 of 2008 ::2::
amongst others by the Chief Minister Punjab, the Finance Minister, the
Irrigation Minister, the Chief Secretary, the Secretaries of the Forests,
Irrigation and Power and Planning and Rural Development Departments etc.
It is stated that in this meeting (the minutes of which have been annexed as
Annexure R-1), a conscious decision was taken that work should be
assigned drain-wise as, in that manner, the efficiency is improved.
We are of the opinion that the matter in hand is a policy issue
which the government is competent to frame. The PWD code is also in the
nature of government instructions and is not binding in the same manner as
a statutory provision. It has not been shown conclusively that the decision
was taken with any extraneous or arbitrary consideration. In this view of
the matter, we find no merit in this writ petition and consequently dismiss
the same with, however, no order as to costs.
( AJAY TEWARI )
JUDGE
( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )
JUDGE
October 15 , 2008
'kk'