8.I must note that even though the petitioner's counsel's submissions appear to be very persuasive, I am afraid I cannot interfere at this point of time. The petitioner virtually missed the bus 06.05.2020, when his WP(MD)Nos.1647 & 3436 of 2020 were dismissed. The petitioner could have persuaded the learned Judge that till the appeal is disposed of, the status-quo that obtained on 06.05.2020 should continue. The petitioner did not succeed in getting such a direction. All that the learned Judge observed was that it is open to the petitioner to try his luck before the Appellate Authority. It is true that the learned Judge indicated that the Appellate Authority can consider the correctness of the stipulation of condition as regards the ownership of even non-basic machinery. The fact remains that this Court did not choose to interfere at that point of time. The matter was remitted to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority was permitted to examine whether considering the nature of work calling for ownership of each and every machinery was really necessary. The Appellate Authority after hearing the tender inviting authority had stated that in the imposition of such conditions there was no discrimination. The Appellate Authority in the facts and circumstances of the case, had come to the conclusion that the condition was necessary. When the matter was put up challenge, this Court had chosen to trust the wisdom of the Appellate Authority. Now, the Appellate Authority had held that the condition was rightly imposed. I am afraid, no purpose will be served by interfering at this point of time. It is seen that the agreements were executed on 08.05.2020. We are now on 20.08.2020. Almost 31/2 months have lapsed. Obviously much water had flown under the bridge; the works must have substantially progressed. Interfering at this point of time will cause confusion. I make it clear that merely because I have dismissed this writ petition at the admission stage it does not mean that I have given seal of approval to the decision of the Appellate Authority as regards the validity of the aforesaid tender condition. The issue of law is left open to be considered in an appropriate case.
