Suppl. Item No. 6-7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 1011 of 2025 with MC(WP(C) No. 927 of 2025 Longjam Romesh Meetei …..Petitioner/s - Versus – State of Manipur & 2 Ors. .... Respondent/s BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 19.12.2025 [1] Present Mr. S. Rupachandra, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Shahidur Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G.A. for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. S. Gangarani, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3 i.e. PDA along with Mr. Pradyumna Arambam, Section Officer, PDA Manipur. [2] By the present writ petition, the petitioner who is an intending bidder to the NIT dated 17.11.2025 approached this Court for allowing his bid to be filed or in alternative to consider and dispose of the representation dated 17.12.2025. As per the original NIT, the last date of opening of bid is on 15.12.2025 but vide notification dated 13.12.2025 uploaded in the website by the PDA, Manipur, the same was re-scheduled on 17.12.2025 at 11:00 hrs for submission of bid and for opening of bid 13:00 hrs on the same day. [3] Mr. S. Rupachandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that on the same day, PDA also issued another notification dated 13.12.2025 mentioning about opening of bid re-scheduled on 17.12.2025 at 13:00 hrs. However, it is stated that out of the two notifications, one at Annexure-A/2 and Annexure-A/3 that there is some inconsistencies in the timeline for submission of bid is at 11:00 hrs and in the circumstances, the petitioner after depositing the requisite money on 16.12.2025 tried to submit bid on 17.12.2025 at 11:30 hrs and the same was not accepted. [4] In the circumstances, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 17.12.2025 to the Secretary, PDA, Manipur for considering his bid as he has submitted all the requisite amounts for allowing him to submit his bid as he has been mislead by the two inconsistent notifications extending the timeline on 17.12.2025. [5] Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the PDA, submits that the notification dated 13.12.2025 at Annexure-A/3 is only a draft and since there was defect in the same, the same was rectified by another notification dated 13.12.2025 at Annexure-A/2 and Annexure-A/2 is the official document uploaded in the website. It is clarified that Annexure-A/3 due to inaccuracy was never taken on record. [6] At this stage, Mr. S. Rupachandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that as per clause 14 of the tender document, the Chairman, PDA has every right to answer any bid and exercising the same, PDA can accept the bid at this moment also. [7] However, Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel for the PDA, expresses doubt about the same and it is also informed that the petitioner has not disclosed the fact of publication of L1, L2 & L3 after opening of the bid on 17.12.2025. [8] However, writ petition is disposed of with a limited prayer of considering the representation dated 17.12.2025 submitted by the petitioner before processing further. [9] With this observation, writ petition is disposed of. Misc. application is also disposed of. [10] Furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel appearing for the parties in the course of the day by whatsapp or any available mode. JUDGE Kh. Joshua Maring KH. JOSHUA MARING Digitally signed by KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2025.12.19 16:18:00 +05'30'