[2026:RJ-JP:5758] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1571/2026 M/s. Dariyanath Electricals And Party, Through Its Proprietor Shri Kamal Singh S/o Shri Fatha Singh Purawat, 3-E-53, New Housing Board, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Registered Office, Vidyut Bhawan, Panchsheel Nagar, Makarwali Ajmer Rajasthan Through Its Managing Director 2. Superintending Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, (Turn Key Works Circle), Vidyut Bhawan, Makarwali, Ajmer Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Khushal Singh Rathore Mr. Indresh Sharma Mr. Ravi Singh For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 06/02/2026 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “a) By an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned E-Tender notice dated 2.1.2026 issued on the basis of BSR 2014 may kindly be cancelled in all respect and the respondents may kindly be directed not to proceed further with the said E-Tender Notice dated 2.1.2026 for opening bid and awarding the work order and respondents may kindly be directed to revise and up-date the BSR-2014 and only thereafter issue the E-Tender Notice afresh. b) Any other order or direction, this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioner. [2026:RJ-JP:5758] (2 of 2) [CW-1571/2026] 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have not made any hike in the Basic Scheduled Rate (for short ‘BSR’) since 2015. He further submits that the petitioner is a regular contractor, participating in the tender process and seeking work for execution. 3. Heard. 4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Prescribing the BSR is a policy decision of the respondents authorities and it is not in the ambit of judicial functioning of the Court to direct the respondents to make hike in the BSR, i.e., the policy decision. 6. It is the prerogative of the respondents to prescribe the BSR after analyzing all the factors, including the process of raw material, labour charges etc. Claim for hike in the BSR in no manner can be said to be fundamental or legal right of the petitioner. Hence, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. 8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to make representation to the concerned respondents authorities, detailing out the relevant factors to persuade the respondents to take the decision for hike in the BSR. 9. The stay application and pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /54