Muhammad Ali Mazhar , J. Mr. Abdul Aziz Dayo advocate has filed vakalatnama for respondent No.6 along with comments.
2. Precisely , the petitioners have prayed for the cancellation of unlawful auction proceedings published by respondent No.6 on 12.06.2020 and 16.06.2020. During pendency of these proceedings, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 has given a clear statement that the earlier auction proceedings have been scrapped and no tender was awarded to any person in pursuance of the auction notices published on 12.06.2020 & 16.06.2020, however , they have also produced a copy of re-auction notice dated 24.10.2020, 22.10.2020 and again 24.10.2020 published in various newspapers for the same contract/invitation of tender and the auction dates for the first attempt is 09.11.2020 at 11:00 a.m., second attempt on 10.11.2020 at 11:00 a.m. and third attempt on 11.11.2020 at 11:00 a.m. Learned counsel for the respondent No.6 has given a clear statement that the petitioner may also apply in the tender proceedings and their bids will be considered in a transparent manner and in accordance with SPPRA Rules.
3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that there is a possibility that since considerable time has been lapsed, therefore, the new contract may not be for a period of one year on which Mr. Abdul Ahad Shaikh, Law Officer, of respondent No.6 as well as learned advocate both have given a clear statement that new contract would be for the year 2020-2021 and duration of contract shall be a minimum perio d of one year. Let the petitioners apply in the fresh tender that would be considered in accordance with Law. Petition is disposed of accordingly along with pending application.