WP(C)/24767/2026 of PRAVANJAN DASH Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 2 September 2026

ORDER

02.09.2026

01.

1. The bid submitted by the petitioner is rejected by the authorities on the premise that the petitioner has not complied with the mandates of Clauses-8 and 9 of the Detailed Tender Call Notice (DTCN). The petitioner has challenged the said order of rejection on the ground that there is no default on his part in compliance with the conditions enshrined under Clauses-8 and 9 of the DTCN and the authorities, for some reasons or other, have proceeded to reject the bid of the petitioner in order to favour a person in whose favour the work has been awarded.

2. Our attention is drawn to the documents annexed to the instant writ petition, which indicate that the petitioner has submitted an affidavit as contemplated in Clause-9 of the DTCN in the prescribed format but we find that another affidavit filed in terms of Clause-8 of the said DTCN with regard to exemption of the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) is not in conformity therewith. Clause-8 of the said DTCN reads thus:- “8. Engineer contractor desiring to avail the exemption of EMD is required to submit an affidavit to this effect that he/she has not yet availed the facility for more than two works during the current calendar year. The bidders have to furnish the original Affidavit and Registration Certificate to the under signed as and when required for verification of the Tender. The successful bidders have to submit the original Affidavit and Registration Certificate to the undersigned before drawal of the Agreement.”

3. The affidavit, annexed to the instant writ petition at Page-26 which according to the petitioner pertains to the compliance of Clause-8 of the DTCN, does not reveal nor contain any averment with regard to non-availing of exemption of the EMD for more than two (02) works during the current calendar year. The said affidavit runs into five (05) paragraphs containing specific averments that the petitioner may be allowed an exemption of EMD under the Odisha Government Rules.

4. The bare reading of Clause-8 of the said DTCN reveals that an Engineer Contractor, who intends or desires to avail the exemption of EMD, must submit an affidavit containing specific expressions that he has not availed such facility for more than two

(02) works during the current calendar year.

5. The moment the conditions are stipulated in the DTCN, it cannot be treated as a mere idle formality but every bid should be submitted in conformity with the conditions so imposed in the DTCN. It is a cardinal principle of law that once the thing is required to be done in a particular manner, it should be done in such manner and not otherwise. [see Nazir Ahmad v. King-Emperor, reported in (AIR) 1936 Privy Council 253]

6. Since the affidavit so relied upon does not appear to have been filed with strict conformity to the said Clause-8 of the DTCN, we do not find any infirmity and/or illegality on the part of the tendering authorities in rejecting the bid of the petitioner.

7. The writ petition sans merit and the same is hereby dismissed.

(Harish Tandon)

Chief Justice

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

S. Behera Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMANTA BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Sep-2026 11:58:39 Signature Not Verified