22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T533,Appeal from judgment, entered for defendants, after order sustaining demurrer to petition for a-writ of mandate. The petition shows that the defendants, as the board of supervisors of the city and county of San Francisco, advertised for sealed proposals for furnishing the said city and county with certain printed forms and blanks, and that the contract would be let to the lowest bidder. The advertisement stated that the “board reserves the right to reject any and all bids if the public good so require.” The petitioner put in a bid in due form, which was the lowest of several bids for the class of work described in the bid. The board rejected all bids “for the reason that public policy demands such action be taken.” The learned judge of the court below, in sustaining the demurrer to the'petition in a written opinion, said:— We agree with the above, and adopt it as part of this opinion. The writ will only issue to compel the performance of an act specially enjoined as a duty resulting from an office. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1085.) If the discretion to be exercised by the inferior tribunal or board was intended to be final, or if there is any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, mandamus will not lie. (Wood v. Strother, 76 Cal. 545 , and cases cited.) The judgment is affirmed. Rehearing denied.24:T553,

Appeal from judgment, entered for defendants, after order sustaining demurrer to petition for a-writ of mandate. The petition shows that the defendants, as the board of supervisors of the city and county of San Francisco, advertised for sealed proposals for furnishing the said city and county with certain printed forms and blanks, and that the contract would be let to the lowest bidder. The advertisement stated that the “board reserves the right to reject any and all bids if the public good so require.” The petitioner put in a bid in due form, which was the lowest of several bids for the class of work described in the bid. The board rejected all bids “for the reason that public policy demands such action be taken.”

The learned judge of the court below, in sustaining the demurrer to the'petition in a written opinion, said:—

We agree with the above, and adopt it as part of this opinion.

The writ will only issue to compel the performance of an act specially enjoined as a duty resulting from an office. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1085.) If the discretion to be exercised by the inferior tribunal or board was intended to be final, or if there is any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, mandamus will not lie. (Wood v. Strother, 76 Cal. 545 , and cases cited.)

The judgment is affirmed.

Rehearing denied.

25:T79d,