C.P.No.D-736  of2016

 

1.    For orders on CMA-1999/2016

2.    For orders on CMA-2000/2016

3.    For KatchaPeshi

4.    For orders on CMA-2001/2016

 

 

Date of hearing:  29.02.2016

Date of reasons: 01.03.2016

 

 

Mr. GhulamMujtabaJakhar Advocate along with petitioner.

                                    ..................

 

 

            Through instant petition, the petitioner, who claims to be approved Government contractor, has expressed his grievance in respect of an advertisement dated 30.01.2016 published in newspaper Kawish in respect of electrical works i.e. fixing of solar polls in talukaUbauro, District Ghotki, wherein, according to petitioner, the respondents did not mention the condition to the effect that only those contractors will apply for the said tender who have got the electrical licence of Sukkur Range. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents were required to mention such condition, as it was done in respect of similar NIT for Karachi Region. Learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to refer to any provision under the SPPRA rules, 2010, which may require the respondents to impose such condition while making advertisement for NITs, however, he could not refer to any such provision. Learned counsel was also directed to satisfy this Court as to how the petitioner has approached this Court, without approaching the relevant authorities, as provided under SPPRA rules 2010 for redressal of grievance relating to public contracts/NITs, however, no plausible explanation has been offered by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner had written a letter to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh in this regard and has also endorsed copy of such letter to Director General, SPPRA, Karachi, however, no response is received.

 

            We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record, which reflects that the petitioner has approached this Court, without any cause of action accrued to the petitioner, whereas, it appears that the petitioner has not, so far, participated in the tender process and has attempted to preempt and frustrate entire tender process.

 

            Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the instant petition, which was accordingly dismissed in limine along with listed applications, by our short order dated 29.02.2016 and these are the reasons for such order. However, before parting with this order, we may observe that the petitioner will be at liberty to agitate his grievance, if permissible under the law and relevant SPPRA rules, before the relevant authorities, by appropriate time, who may consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and as per rules.

 

 

 

                                                                       JUDGE

 

 

                                                JUDGE

 

N.M.