| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 3078 = 2001 SLD 3078 = 2001 CLC 256 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.13109 of 2000, decided on 11th August, 2000.
Presented By: Tanvir Ahmad Khan, J
Ali Ahmed Awan, Ashtar Ausaf Ali, Ind Ahmad Awan and Khalid Mehmood Ansari for Petitioner. Syed Afzal Haider, Jahangir A. Jhoja for
Respondents Nos. l to 6. Irfan Qadir for
Respondents Nos. 8 and 11.
Writ Petition No.13109 of 2000, decided on 11th August, 2000.
Presented By: Tanvir Ahmad Khan, J
Ali Ahmed Awan, Ashtar Ausaf Ali, Ind Ahmad Awan and Khalid Mehmood Ansari for Petitioner. Syed Afzal Haider, Jahangir A. Jhoja for
Respondents Nos. l to 6. Irfan Qadir for
Respondents Nos. 8 and 11.
Messrs Syed TASNIM HUSSAIN NAQVI---Petitioner
VERSUS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary/Chairman, Railway Board, Islamabad and 10 others---Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Exercise of discretion on whimsical ground---Validity---Accepting or rejecting pre-qualification application for tender---Scope---Where the Competent Authority has got ample discretion to accept or reject such application, the discretion is not of personal nature attached to the holder of the office---Such Authority cannot exercise its discretion on whimsical ground. Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Rawalpindi v. Pakistan Mutual Insurance Company Limited, Rawalpindi PLD 1991 SC 14 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Railway contract, approval of-- Petitioner was not declared qualified by the Vigilance Directorate of the Railway Authorities, to participate in the contract---Railway Authorities only informed the successful contractors regarding the holding of the auction three days prior to the scheduled date---News in two daily news paper was also flashed but on the day when the auction was to take place---Competent Authority accepted/approved the contract on the same day in spite of the fact that the offer of the petitioner had already reached before the Authority alongwith Bank draft for a sum of Rs.10 lacs---Offer of the petitioner for the contract was for a sum of Rs.8 crores whereas Railway Authorities accepted the contract for a sum of Rs.6 crores---Petitioner was disqualified on account of his litigation with the Railway Authorities in some earlier contract whereas that matter was sub judice before Supreme Court---Offer of the petitioner was not accepted by the Authorities on the ground that tendered amount could not be recovered by the contractor unless involved in malpractice---Validity---Simply on the ground that the petitioner had given a higher offer for the contract would not deprive him of his right particularly so when the contract on the face of it was neither open nor transparent--- Where the Railway Authorities, without taking into consideration the interest of the exchequer, in a very hastily manner, had dolled up the contract for Rs.6 crores, such auction could not be sustained on any ground same having been made without…