"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.384 of 2026 ====================================================== M/s Solanki Engicon Private Limited (a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 2013) having its Registered office at House No. 11, Vill.- Chhotkipatti, Bagah, Pashchim Champaran, Bihar - 845101 through its Director Mr. Samir Suman, aged about 35 years, S/o Manoj Kumar Rao. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department 5th Floor, Vishvshwarya Bhawan, Bailey Road Patna. 2. Engineer-in-Chief cum Additional Commissioner cum Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, 5th Floor, Vishvshwarya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. Chief Engineer, Rural Works Department, Muzaffarpur. 4. Superintendent Engineer, Rural Works Department, Bettiah. 5. Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Bettiah. 6. Nodal Officer, Mukhya Mantri Gram Sampark Yojna, Rural Work Department, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Avocate Mr. Ankesh Bibhu, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate-02 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH) 2 31-01-2026 The present writ application has been filed for the following reliefs: a) For Quashing of Memo bearing Memo no. 3238, Dated 16.12.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 whereby and where-under the Technical Bid of the Petitioner of Tender issued under MMGSY by Work Division-Bettiah bearing Package No. MMGSY (AWSESH-SC)- Betia-825 Printed from counselvise.com Patna High Court CWJC No.384 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026 2/4 has been rejected on the nonest ground that there is difference of Annual Turnover in the Annual Return and 26AS (TDS Certificate) of the petitioner in the Financial Years 2023-24 and 2022-23, whereas the petitioner’s tender has been rejected on the basis of violation of Clause 4.7 of the Combined Model Bidding Document (hereinby referred to as “CMBD”) and the said Clause states about the misleading and false representation in the forms, statements, affidavit and attachments submitted in proof of the qualification requirement and the petitioner had not made any false submission during the declaration of the turnover and the difference in Annual Turn Over reflected in Annual Return and 26AS (TDS Certificate not amount to misrepresentation or false representation. b) For Issuance of the Writ in nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner’s Bid, as the petitioner is having the requisite qualification as required in the tender document and having the required annual turnover as demanded in Clause 4.4A of the CMBD and even Turn Over mentioned in Annual Return is higher than the mount in which TDS had been deducted and TDS Certificate i.e 26AS had been issued, will not reduced the Turn Over of the Financial Year declared and tax paid by petitioner before Income Tax Authority. c) For restraining the respondent authorities from the Opening of Financial Bid of Tender Package No.- MMGSY (AWSESH-SC)- Betia-825, till the disposal of the present writ Printed from counselvise.com Patna High Court CWJC No.384 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026 3/4 application, as the petitioner having good ground for consideration and to get qualified in the Technical Bid. d) For issuance of any other relief or reliefs as Your Lordship may deem fit. 2. Under the impugned order dated 16.12.2025 itself, liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a complaint in the event he was aggrieved by the said order, which is reproduced below: Printed from counselvise.com Patna High Court CWJC No.384 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026 4/4 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a complaint was filed on 22.12.2025, which is pending till date. A copy of the complaint has been produced in course of proceedings and is marked as ‘X’ and shall form part of the record. 4. Considering the fact that the said complaint is still pending before respondent No. 5, respondent No. 5 is directed to dispose of the said complaint within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order, after granting due opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. 6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Anushka/- (Sudhir Singh, J) (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) U Printed from counselvise.com "