Akhil Bhartiya Hindi Prakashak Sangh vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Akhil Bhartiya Hindi Prakashak Sangh, an association of Hindi publishers, challenged the eligibility criteria in an Expression of Interest (EOI) issued by the respondent, the Department of Education, Government of Bihar, and the Bihar Education Project Council. The challenged criteria included registration with the GST Department, a valid PAN, an average turnover of Rs. 5 crores in any financial year ending March 13, 2023, and past experience supplying at least 25,000 books to state government schools. The petitioner filed this writ petition in a representative capacity. The respondents noted that the petitioner had not been declined participation and that a tender had since been published. The petitioner also claimed a similar writ petition was pending before the court.
Held
The Court held that a second writ petition on a similar cause of action, filed in a representative capacity, cannot be entertained. The Court noted that the petitioner had stated in their writ petition that no other writ petition had been filed for the impugned grievances, which contradicted their submission about a pending similar writ petition (CWJC No. 4928 of 2022). The Court observed that the earlier writ petition had become infructuous as work orders had been issued. The Court found no reason to entertain the present writ petition, especially as the petitioner did not claim an intention to participate in the notified work and had not demonstrated eligibility to apply or submit a tender. The Court refrained from commenting on the merits of the challenge to the EOI criteria due to the pendency of other writ petitions.
Key Issues
1. Whether a second writ petition on a similar cause of action, filed in a representative capacity, can be entertained by the Court, particularly when an earlier writ petition on a similar grievance was filed and is pending. (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that a similar writ petition had been filed and admitted by the Court and was still pending, implying a right to pursue this matter. They relied on the pendency of CWJC No. 4928 of 2022. Respondents' Contention: The respondents argued that a second writ petition on a similar cause of action cannot be entertained, especially when filed in a representative capacity. They also pointed out that the petitioner had not been declined participation in the EOI and that the last date for EOI submission had passed, with a new tender published. They highlighted that the earlier writ petition (CWJC No. 4928 of 2022) had become infructuous as work orders had already been issued.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 02-12-2024 The petitioner is an association of Hindi publishers registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the declared objective of the petitioner, is to primarily protect the interest of the Hindi book publishers as well as to maintain and excel the level of Hindi literature.
The petitioner has challenged the conditions imposed in the Expression of Interest (for brevity ‘EOI’)
2/4 brought out by the respondent, as per Annexure P-3. The petitioner is aggrieved with three out of the four conditions stipulated as the eligibility/qualification criteria. The qualification criteria challenged by the petitioner are that the publisher should be registered with the GST Department and carry a valid PAN number, the publisher should have a name or firm name with an average turnover of Rs. 5 crores; in any financial year ending on 13.03.2023, and that the publisher should have past experience with similar requirements and supply of at least 25,000 books at any State Government school/ educational institution.
The learned Advocate General who appeared for the respondent and Shri Girijesh Kumar appearing for the Bihar Education Project Council pointed out that the petitioner does not have a case of having being declined participation in the EOI. The petitioner is agitating the cause in a representative capacity. It is also stated that the last date for receipt of EOI was 07.09.2024 and a tender has been published on 28.11.2024, the last date of which was 18.12.2024. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner vigorously pointed out that even earlier a similar writ petition was filed and the same has been admitted by this Court and is still pending 3/4 before this court.
We see that the petitioner has in the writ petition stated in Paragraph-2 that they have not filed any other writ petition may be heard along with CWJC No. 1762 of 2022 (M/s University Book House Private Limited and The State of Bihar and Ors.), the matter was posted for joint hearing. When the EOI came, the petitioner ought to have moved the earlier writ petition and timely, agitated the cause.
We find absolutely no reason to entertain the writ 4/4 petition, filed in a representative capacity, where the petitioner does not even have a contention that the petitioner intended to express their interest in the work notified and especially when there is an earlier petition filed on the same grievance. We restrain from making any comments on the challenge made, only since the other writ petitions are pending before this Court. The petitioner also cannot challenge the writ petition, in a representative capacity, when the petitioner does not by itself have the status of an entity eligible to apply under the EOI or submit a tender for the work notified.
We dismiss the writ petition for the reasons stated above.
Anushka/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) U
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.