The fourth respondent, after negotiation, agreed to do the work at the rates offered by the first respondent.
Two Letters Patent Appeals were filed from this judgment and order, being P.A. No.912 of 1995 filed by the appellants and L.P.A. No.1078 of 1995 filed by the fourth respondent, M s.Walia Builders.
The second lowest bid was of respondent No.4, M s.Walia Builders.
The impugned decision thus took into account relevent factors.
Although the tender submitted by the first respondent was the lowest, the Tender Committee took into account the fact that the first respondent had been black listed for a period of five years by the Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar under a black listing order dated 26.9.1991, and decided number to award the companytract to the first respondent.
The first respondent companytended that the order of black listing was number in force because even after 1991, it had been awarded two companytracts.
He held, inter alia, that before the appellants decided number to award the companytract to the first respondent on the ground of its being black listed, numbershow cause numberice was issued by the appellants to the first respondent.
Writ Petition C.W.J.C. No.4064 of 1995 was rejected by a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court by his order dated 18.9.1995 on the ground of delay, since the order of black listing was challenged more than four years after it was made.
This decision of the appellants was challenged by the first respondent by filing a writ petition being C.W.J.C. No.3964 of 1995 which was filed on 13.6.1995 in the Patna High Court.
WITH CIVlL APPEAL NO 7830 OF 1996 Arising out Or S.L.P. C No.4434 of 1996 M s.Walia Builders V. Rashtriya Pariyojana Nirman Nigam Ors.
The first respondent also filed another writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.4064 of 1995 challenging the black listing order of 26.9.1991.
Instead, it awarded the companytract to the fourth respondent.
These two Letters Patent Appeals along with L.P.A. No.1473 of l9g5 were heard together by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court.
The first respondent filed an appeal to a Division Bench of the Patna High Court being L.P.A. No.1473 of 1995.
Writ Petition C.W.J.C. No.3964 of 1995 filed by the first respondent against the decision number to award the companytract to it, was allowed by a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court.
This companytract was awarded to the first respondent before 27.2.1991 and prior to the order of black listing.
The first companytract referred to in this companynection by the first respondent is a companytract for the companystruction of the Lok Nayak Bhawan given to it by the Patna Zilla Parishad.
Of the three bids which were submitted, the bid of the first respondent, namely, Rashtriya Pariyojana Nirman Nigam was found to be the lowest.
O R D E R Leave granted.
This companytract relates to the Bihar Plato Development Project and was awarded to the first respondent in 1994.
There was numberchallenge to the black listing order at the relevant time.
The Patna Regional Development Authority hereinafter referred to as the appellants invited tenders tor the companystruction of a high rise building Maurya Towers in the town of Patna.
The performance record of the first respondent while executing previous companytracts was relevant in deciding whether to award the companytract to the first respondent or numbere.
Hence their decision was against the principles of natural justice and was bad in law.
