[2025:RJ-JP:43692] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16498/2025 CPC Greens, A Sole Proprietor Concern Having Its Address At- Gopal Colony, Mangrol Road, Baran, Rajasthan 325205 Through Its Sole Proprietor Mr. Hitesh Choudhary ----Petitioner Versus 1. Municipal Council, Bundi Having Its Address At - Near Kumbha Stadium, Chattarpura Road, Bundi Through Its Commissioner 2. The Director, Local Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan, G-3 Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-302016, Rajasthan. 3. M/s. Kota Trucks Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Address At - A 165, Road No. 5, Indraprastha Industrial Area, Jhalawar Road, Kota- 324005. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mudit Singhvi with Mr. Mayank Batra, Ms. Ayushi Bansal & Mr. Stephen John HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 31/10/2025 The present writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondent - Municipal Council, Bundi in rejecting the technical bid of the present petitioner. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that as a matter of fact, out of six bids, the bids of five bidders have been declared to be non-responsive and only the bid submitted by the respondent No.3 was considered and the tender was awarded in its favour. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised various grounds raising question mark over the manner in which the tender process was conducted by the respondent – council, stating that the entire tender process has been conducted in a pre-determined manner and in clear defiance of the provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 (for short ‘the Act of 2012’). [2025:RJ-JP:43692] (2 of 2) [CW-16498/2025] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while challenging the said action of the Municipal Council, Bundi, statutory appeal as provided under Section 38 of the Act of 2012 has already been preferred by the petitioner, however, no effective proceedings in the same have been done by the Appellate Authority i.e. respondent No.2. Learned counsel further states that if the appeal so preferred by the petitioner is not considered expeditiously and the respondent No.3 is permitted to complete the tender work, then the entire purpose of filing said statutory appeal would be frustrated. Heard. Perused the material available on record. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the record of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority i.e. respondent No.2 to consider and decide the statutory appeal so preferred on behalf of the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Learned counsel has informed that the next date fixed in the appeal is 03.11.2025. The petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Authority (in person or through his counsel) on 03.11.2025 and request for expeditious disposal of the said appeal while supplying the copy of this order. The Appellate Authority is expected to consider and decide the appeal of the petitioner after granting opportunity of hearing and in accordance with law, within the time stipulated in this order. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J SAHIL SONI /10