SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures 2025:UHC:1653-DB COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 10.03.2025 WPMB No. 69 OF 2025 Hon'ble G. Narendar, C.J. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Sagar Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The short point that is canvassed before this Court is that the respondents have rejected the bid of the petitioner, who claimed himself to be L-1, on the ground that the petitioner’s PAN Card was issued in the year 2020 and he has submitted Income Tax Returns from the year 2019. The ITRs which were submitted by the petitioner bear different Permanent Account Numbers (PANs). Hence, respondent no.2 recommended for re-tender. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the notification for re-tendering of the same work has been issued. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the ITRs submitted by the petitioner were having multiple Permanent Account Numbers, as for Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22, the Permanent Account Number is ‘ACDFS5774J’ and that for Assessment Years 2022-23 and 2023-24, the Permanent Account Number is ‘AEEFS1637M’. Thus, the petitioner was having multiple PAN Cards, which was not permissible. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not deny this fact, but submits that since earlier the petitioner was a partnership firm and they intended to convert it into a private limited company by the same, as such, they have surrendered their earlier PAN Card, but the private limited company could not be formed, therefore, they have continued with the same partnership firm and obtained a new PAN Card. 7. It is settled proposition of law that an individual or firm cannot have multiple PAN Cards. In that view of the matter, the decision of the respondents to re- advertise the tender does not warrant any interference. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition being bereft of substance and merit, stands rejected. 9. In is made clear that rejection of the writ petition will not come in the way of the petitioner, if desires to participate in the re-tender. 10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J) (G. Narendar, CJ) 10.03.2025 10.03.2025 NISHANT