1 2025:CGHC:1640-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 90 of 2025 M/s Ravindra Prasad Through Proprietor Ravindra Prasad S/o- Ganesh Prasad Aged About 59 Years R/o- Plot No. 95, Pragati Nagar, Risali Main Road Bhilai District- Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban And Rural Administration Development Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Risali, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Risali, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - Bharatiya Security Services Through Proprietor Meena Patel OfÏce At B-44 Near Shiv Mandir In front Of Jayaswal Kirana Store Karamchari Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 5 - ELEEMECH Technocrats Through Proprietor Mohammed Zaheer OfÏce At Qtr-4-A, Street-16, Sector-1 Bhilai District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate For Respondent(s) / State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Advocate General For Respondent(s) / Municipal Corporation : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 10.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Krishna Tandon, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondent/State as well as Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The present writ petition is preferred challenging disqualification of the petitioner's bid on 23/12/2024 received by the petitioner via e-mail by the respondent authority by way of non-transparency in tender proceedings which is being carried out the Municipal Corporation Risali because the Corporation has not opened the tender on 19/12/2024 and all of a sudden cancelled the bid on the ground that the petitioner has not deposited insufÏcient solvency certificate whereby no such condition is mentioned in the terms and conditions of the tender. 3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents that in an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed WPC No. 88/2025 (M/s Shankar Prasad Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others) and WPC No. 94/2025 (M/s Rudra Construction vs. State 3 of Chhattisgarh & Others) vide order dated 09.01.2025. They further submit that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WPC No. 88/2025 and WPC No. 94/2025, this petition may also be dismissed in the same terms. 4. WPC No. 88/2025 (M/s Shankar Prasad Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others) was dismissed by this court, observing as follows : “After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and considering that the petitioner could not specifically point out as the respondents authority have violated which conditions of the NIT while rejecting his tender and further the fact that in view of the clause 3.8.1 of the NIT, the petitioner’s bid was rejected, we do not find any substance in the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.” 5. WPC No. 94/2025 (M/s Rudra Construction vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) was dismissed by this court, observing as follows : “Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and that the petitioner has not shown any irregularity committed by the respondent authority while rejecting the petitioner’s bid and further that the requirement of aforesaid clause has not been fulfilled, we do not find any substance in the present petition. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.” 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this petition is identical to that of in WPC No. 88/2025 and WPC No. 94/2025 and as such, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WPC No. 88/2025 and WPC No. 94/2025. 4 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in terms of the order dated 09.01.2025 passed in WPC No. 88/2025 and WPC No. 94/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Manpreet / Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.01.13 18:06:16 +0530