1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.4023 of 2026 Decided on: 30.03.2026 Kartike Guleria ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Gautam, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sahil Dixit, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Arsh Rattan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice(Oral) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that respondent No.2 vide order dated 25.03.2026, Annexure P/3 has cancelled the earlier tender dated 06.02.2026 on the ground of administrative reasons and has invited fresh tenders for the same work, which is not justified and nothing can be deciphered from 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the said communication as to what are the reasons of the cancellation of earlier tender and calling of fresh tender. 2. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted representation dated 26.03.2026 to respondent No.3 against the said action by holding out that the financial bids were opened, in which rates quoted by him were lowest. 3. Counsel for the State, on the basis of instructions received from the Executive Engineer, Jal Shakti Division Mandi has pointed out that there are three bidders and out of them, two had not uploaded the required mandatory documents of the income tax returns and their bids should have been held as non-responsive, but the Senior Assistant, as such, had not done the needful leading to opening of all the three financial bids and resultantly effect was only the present petitioner would have been in the fray and the bid was not liable to be opened. A show cause notice has also been issued to the concerned officer on 24th March, 2026. This aspect had been brought to their notice on a compliant received from one Rahul Sharma. 4. Keeping in view the above, we are of the considered opinion that let a speaking order be passed on 3 the representation of the petitioner before the finalization of the fresh tender process, which has been initiated. It is made clear that we are not commenting upon the merits of the case and it is open to the petitioner to challenge the said order in case it is adverse to him and also to take part in the fresh tender process. 5. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice March 30, 2026 (Jiya Lal Bhardwaj) (mamta) Judge