Patna High Court
Deepak Singh vs The Punjab National Bank Through Its ... on 7 July, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17698 of 2017
======================================================
Deepak Singh S/o late Harihar Singh R/o Village-Hasanpur, P.O.Mahisana,
P.S.- Lakhisarai Sadar, District- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Punjab National Bank Through Its Chairman and Ors
2. The Chief Manager, Divisional Officer Punjab National Bank, Biharsharif,
P.S. Town, District Naland
3. The Divisional Manager, Divisional officer, P.N.B, Biharsharif
Ramchandrapur, P.S. Town, District N
4. The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Lakhisarai, P.S. Town, District-
Lakhisarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Adv.
: Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Kumar Priya Ranjan, Adv.
Mr.Rajan Ghoshrawe, (Adv for PNB)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-07-2025
1. The petitioner has prayed for the following
reliefs:
(i) To issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus to direct the
respondents to consider this after of
the petitioner which was submitted in
connection with Tender Notification
made in the Daily News paper Dainik
Jagran in terms of the fact that
petitioner had offered lowest rate and
highest facilities by fulfilling act
Patna High Court CWJC No.17698 of 2017 dt.07-07-2025
2/5
requirement as published in tender
notification.
(ii) To hold and declare that
the & act & process adopted by the
respondent Bank is contrary to the
terms as contemplated in the law
arising out of Art.14 of Constitution of
India & Contract Act. According the
pleased to canceal the settlement held
between Respondent bank and
Respondent No. 4 hereof.
(iii) To direct the respondent
to accept the offer of the petitioner
which was submitted through the
consignment No. EF287116773IN
received on 21.07.2017 at the office of
Respondent No. 2.
(iv) To grant any other reliefs
for which petitioner is entitled to have
in connection with the aforesaid reliefs.
2. The brief facts, as culled out from the Writ
petition, is that the petitioner made an application
pursuant to a tender notification published in daily
newspaper Dainik Jagaran, edition dated 15.06.2017
wherein tenders were invited from suitable
candidates who could set up a constituted campus
Patna High Court CWJC No.17698 of 2017 dt.07-07-2025
3/5
and premises measuring between 1200 sq. ft. to
1600 sq. ft. As per the tender documents submitted
by the petitioner, he stated that he has carpet are of
1448 sq. ft. including a parking area of 1114 sq. ft.
situated at Lal Pahari, Ward No. 30, Kawaiya Police
Station, Lakhisarai. The petitioner approached to the
Divisional Officer on 07.08.2017, where he was
informed by one of the officers of the Bank, namely
Jitendra Kumar Singh, that the consignment sent by
the petitioner was received on 26.07.2017 whereas
Post Office informed that it had been delivered on
21.07.2017
. Subsequently, the petitioner came to
know that he was not considered and that there had
and third parties. The petitioner also made a
representation before Divisional Manager of Punjab
National bank, Biharsharif, enclosing all relevant
documents. However, the bank adopted a pick-and-
choose method and did not consider the application
of the petitioner, for which the present Writ petition
has been filed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17698 of 2017 dt.07-07-2025
3. A detailed counter affidavit was filed by
the respondent, Punjab National Bank, denying all
the material allegations made in the Writ petition.
The counter affidavit disclose that the advertisement
was published in newspaper Danik Jagaran on
09.07.2017, inviting tenders from interested parties.
Altogether 15 tenders were received by the
respondent-Bank, out of which one tender was found
to be invalid. However, 14 tenders, including that of
the petitioner, were duly considered by the
authorities. As per the guidelines contained in GSAD
Circular No. 07/2016, dated 11.08.2017, a survey
team was constituted by the competent authority
and sent to inspect the sites for which valid tenders
were received, including the site proposed by the
petitioner. The Survey Committee submitted its
report to the Building Committee of Biharsharif Circle
of the respondent-Bank. As per the report, three
proposals were shortlisted as technically suitable for
the respondent-Bank, whereas the site of the
petitioner was found technically unsuitable by the
Building Committee. Thereafter, the financial offers
Patna High Court CWJC No.17698 of 2017 dt.07-07-2025
of only those applicants who were shortlisted were
taken into consideration, and the tender was given to
the applicant who quoted the lowest rate.
4. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the
respondents.
5. On perusal of the record, the counter
affidavit clearly discloses that the petitioner's land
was not as per the norms, and the Survey Committee
had considered only three tenders out of the
fourteen, and the lowest price among the three was
finalized by the Bank. Therefore, this Court finds no
error or irregularity in the order passed by the
respondent-Bank.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ
petitions stands disposed of as it deviod of merits.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
AMANDEEP/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 09.07.2025.
Transmission Date
