MALIK MUSHTAQ GOODS TRANSPORT CO., LAHORE versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY RAILWAYS, ISLAMABAD
Sections 1 (2) (3), 2 (J) and 26 of the Public Procurement Rules, 2004, R2 (C), 3, 4, 20, 34 (2), 40, 42 and 48 of the attached van van contract Failure to process the auction with railway trains running on auctioned routes and the return of call deposit to the bidders without the formal agreement signed by the Authority Validate Authority could not show any law, rule, rule and instructions under which. Pakistan Railways was not allowed to contract without being invited to the Authority. Will fall as a department. Under the definition of the procurement agency provided in section 2 (j) of the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002, the concept of competitive bidding open to the public, 2004, was in line with the notion that a procurement agency may use it Ensure transparent use of options in contractual delivery. The negotiating contract was specifically banned by the R40 of the Contracting Rules, the transparent use of authority by government officials in the signing of the 2004 treaties was always insisted that the competitive bidding Emergencies to be ignored to the process should be ensured, as contained in Rule 42 (v) of the Rules, 2004, not present, allowing the respondents to adopt the negotiation process to contract No authority order was on record. Respondents were not only legally authorized to perform the contract, but were performed in a non-transparent manner, therefore,
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
