Disposed

Diwakar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Dec 2025CWJC/19993/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bidder challenged technical bid decisions under a Rural Works Department tender, alleging respondent no. 8 was wrongly declared technically qualified. The court, noting an existing representation before respondent no. 3, directed it to decide the representation after hearing stakeholders within 10 days and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 3 directed to decide petitioner's representation in accordance with law after hearing stakeholders, preferably within 10 days.

Diwakar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Public Procurement and Tenders | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19993 of 2025

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Diwakar Kumar a sole proprietorship, having its Office At Manipur Maruwaha, P.O.- Bharrahi, P.S. and District- Madhepura (Bihar), through its Proprietor, namely Diwakar Kumar, aged about 23 years (Male), Son of Yogendra Prasad Yadav, Resident of Ward No. 05, Maruvaha, Manikpur, P.O.Bharrahi, P.S. and District- Madhepura, Bihar- 852113.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, 5th Floor, Visvesvaraya Bhawan, Nehru Path, Patna, Bihar 800015.

¶7

The Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, 5th Floor, Visvesvaraya Bhawan, Nehru Path, Patna, Bihar 800015.

¶8

The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, 5th Floor, Visvesvaraya Bhawan, Nehru Path, Patna, Bihar 800015.

¶9

The Chief Engineer-4, (Purnea) Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar.

¶10

The Superintending Engineer, Work Circle Madhepura, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar.

¶11

The Executive Engineer, Work Circle Madhepura, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar.

¶12

The Nodal Officer, Mukhya Mantri Gramin Sadak Unnayan Yojana, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar.

¶13

M/s R.K. Construction (Bid ID- 625036), Plot No. 9, Bhuiyadih, P.O.Agrico, P.s.- Sitaramdera Jamshedpur Jharkhand- 831009 through its Proprietor, namely, Rajender Shangari, Son of Late Jagdish Shangari.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shrishti Singh, Advocate Mr. Parnav Kumar, Advocate Mr. Saurabh Sundar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, A.G, ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶16

(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶17

2 24-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.19993 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 2/3

¶19

Following is the relief sought for in the present writ

¶20

application:-

¶21

“(i) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the revised technical bid decision dated 25.11.2025 published through memo no. 3997 dated 28.11.2025 in relation to NIT No. RRSMP-11/2025-26 of the Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, to the extent that the respondent no. 8 has been once again, declared as technically qualified for package no. RRSMP/25-26 Madhepura / 04 (Annexure-P/4, Pg.39).

¶22

(ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the technical bid decision dated 08.09.2025 published through memo no. 3337 dated 09.09.2025 in relation to NIT No. RRSMP-11/2025-26 of the Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, to the extent that the respondent no. 8 has been declared as technically qualified for package no. RRSMP/25-26 Madhepura/04 (Annexure-P/2, Pg.34).

¶23

(iii) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing any consequential action taken pursuant to the impugned decision, including revising the financial bid result, quashing of any letter of award, agreements entered with third party, if any.

¶24

(iv) To any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶25

In respect of the grievance as raised in the present

¶26

writ application, it is noted that the petitioner has already made

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.19993 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 3/3

¶28

a representation vide Annexure-P/5 before Respondent No. 3.

¶29

Respondent No. 3 is directed to consider and decide

¶30

the said representation in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, preferably within a period 10 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶31

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ applications stands disposed of.

¶32

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶33

(Sudhir Singh, ACJ)

¶34

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶35

Sachin/-

¶36

Diwakar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diwakar Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankit Kumar Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary

Smt. Nilam Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar Thakur (Nh- 327E-4L of Galgalia - Bahadurganj Section Pkg-I and II on Epc) Vs The Uion of India

Vrijmohan Bhuiyan Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Anirudh Sarswati Construction Vs The State of Bihar