1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4; and learned senior counsel for appearing for respondent No.3.

2. Petitioner and respondent No.3 along with others are bidders relating to a tender called for under e-procurement relating to the work i.e., Periodical Renewals to Burgampanad Eturunagaram Road from km 25/0 to 33/0 and 45/0 to 53/6 in Khammam District.

3. The specific case of the petitioner in the affidavit is that the said tender notification required all the bidders to invariably upload the scanned copies of DD/BG in e-procurement system and the same would be the primary requirement to consider the bid response.

All the bidders were, therefore, required to carry out and upload all their documents seeking eligibility to offer the price bid and the technical evaluation was notified to be conducted solely based upon the uploaded certificates/documents etc., through e-procurement system. Petitioner states that he as well as all other bidders including respondent No.3 submitted their technical and price bids by uploading the documents in accordance with the tender notice.

However, respondent No.3 did not upload all the documents with regard to availability of either owned or leased machinery for the purpose of mobilization advance of the key and critical equipment of the work stipulated.

4. Petitioner further states that respondent No.3 has submitted a representation to respondent No.2 accepting that he could not upload the aforesaid documents and sought to producing the said documents physically at the time of evaluation which, however, was accepted by respondent No.2 and treating respondent No.3 as eligible, the price bids were evaluated. Basing on the price bid evaluation, the petitioner was found to be L2 whereas respondent No.3 was found as L1.

The present writ petition is, therefore, filed questioning the action of respondent No.2 in evaluating and considering the price bid of respondent No.3 and declaring him as L1, on the ground that respondent No.3 deviated from the tender conditions by physically handing over the documents instead of uploading them.

5. When this writ petition initially came up on 27.01.2015,

I passed the following order:

“Petitioner and the third respondent among other contractors have submitted their bids with regard to the tenders called for Burgampahad Eturunagaram road from KM 25 to 33 and 45 to 53/6 in Khammam District in pursuance of notice inviting tenders dated 24.12.2014.

In view of the letter of the third respondent seeking to produce essential document of eligibility not through E-platform as per the terms of the tender but by physical production, selecting the third respondent as L1 is questioned.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings seeks time to get instructions from respondents 1, 2 and 4.

Personal service to third respondent is permitted.

List after one week in ‘ML’.

Pending further orders, the tenders, in question, as above, shall not be finalized.”

6. Counters have since been filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3.

I have heard all the learned counsel as noted above.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on the basis of tender conditions, that submission of bids as well as uploading of documents was required to be under e-procurement platform as per the terms and conditions of the bid and he also brings to the notice of the court that clause 3(iii) specifically states that department shall carry out technical evaluation solely basing upon uploaded certificates/ documents. Learned counsel also points out that the further clause under general terms and conditions require that bidders should submit the particulars invariably in the format specified in the tender schedule along with necessary certificates. Learned counsel submits that admittedly respondent No.3 has not submitted the documents on e-platform with regard to availability of old or leased machinery and key and cri