ORDER M. Katju and R. S. Tripathi, JJ.
1. The petitioner is challenging the grant of contract for excavation of Sand and Morang in favour of respondent No. 3 in this writ petition.
2. Learned standing counsel, Sri R.K. Ojha and Sri P.S. Mishra may file counter-affidavit within three weeks. List thereafter.
3. It appears that after the auction, none of the bids was accepted and the contract in question was settled by private negotiations with respondent No. 3. Prima facie, in our opinion, this is illegal as held by the Supreme Court in Ram and Shyam Company v. State of Haryana and Ors., AIR 1985 SC 1147 and this Court in Abdul Gaffar v. State of U. P. and Ors., 1998 (1) AWC 706 and Ashok Kamar v. State of U. P., 1995 ACJ 1066. In the circumstances, we direct that nobody shall operate the contract in question till further orders.
4. Learned standing counsel submits that only the State Government can give the contract but Sri Ojha submits that the Zila Panchayat is entitled to give the contract. We are not deciding this controversy at this stage because, prima facie, we are of the opinion that the contract given to respondent No. 3 is illegal for the reasons already mentioned above. Hence, we direct the competent authority concerned to settle the contract in question, after advertising it in two well-known newspapers having wide circulation and thereafter putting it to public auction after giving notice to all eligible persons concerned. This procedure is essential to comply with Article 14 of the Constitution and to ensure transparency in grant of public contracts.
5. Till fresh contract is given, as directed above, the District Magistrate, Allahabad, through his officials will operate the contract in question as an interim measure till further orders, or till grant of the theka, whichever is earlier.