The tendering authority has the power to negotiate with the L-1 tenderer for the rates quoted considering the reasonability of the rates for different categories.

JUDGMENT

U Durga Prasad Rao, J. - The petitioner prays for writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in not considering the bid of the petitioner who is the successful bidder and complied with all conditions and instead, issuing work order dated 22.09.2020 to 5th respondent, who was disqualified in the tender process i.e., in the financial bid (Annexure-III), as illegal, arbitrary and against the tender conditions and for a consequential direction to the respondents 3 & 4 herein not to enter into agreement with 5th respondent by virtue of the aforesaid work order dated 22.09.2020 and pass such other orders deemed fit.

2. The petitioner's case succinctly is thus:

(a) The petitioner's firm offers outsourcing manpower and security agencies to the State and Central Government Sectors and also Private Sectors. Pursuant to the tender notification in Government e-Procurement system of the 1ST respondent (CPP Portal) dated 05.02.2020, the petitioner submitted e-Tender on 19.02.2020 by complying all terms and conditions. In the technical bid opened on 21.02.2020 at the office of 3rd respondent, the petitioner's technical bid along with other was approved. In the said bid the 5th respondent was also shown as approved. However, later the petitioner came to know that the 5th respondent failed to comply with the conditions of the tender notification, more particularly, Annexure-III of the Financial Bid. The petitioner further came to know that the respondent authorities did not assign said work to 5th respondent till date and the 7th respondent who was unsuccessful in the tender process, is still continuing by virtue of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.17926/2020. In fact, the 7th respondent succeeded in the e-Tender for the earlier year 2018-2019 and as per the agreement with the respondent authority, she was extended for further time till 30.04.2021. The petitioner has no dispute with regard to the extension of the tenure of the 7th respondent, but the petitioner's main grievance is against the approval of the 5th respondent.

(b) The 5th respondent was disqualified in the e-Tender dated 05.02.2020, for, he quoted lesser wages than stipulated in the Annexure-III, but still he was declared as lowest bidder i.e., L1, which is highly illegal and arbitrary and his bid ought to be rejected in the said e-Tender, but due to extraneous consideration he was shown as successful bidder.

(c) Likewise the 6th respondent who was declared as lowest bidder at Sl.No.2 also has not complied with the terms of the notification, more particularly clause iv of the terms and conditions of the tender notification, as monthly bills shall be accompanied with the list showing the names of the staff, wages per month or day, number of duty days, total days to be paid each, total recoveries of ESI, EPF etc., and those conditions are absent in his tender application and therefore, the 6th respondent's bid ought to have rejected.

(d) Further, the respondents 5 & 6 never rendered their services to the respondent authorities and therefore, considering them as L1 & L2 is quite contrary to the conditions of the tender.

Hence, the writ petition.

3. The respondents 1 to 4 filed counter opposing the writ petition and contending thus:

(a) The 3rd respondent invited the e-tender quotations dated 05.02.2020 for the agencies to provide manpower to perform jobs assigned to Staff Nurse, Office Assistant, Lab Technicians, Pharmacist, Cook, Security Guards, Multi Tasking Staff, Peon, Electrician, Plumber & Safaiwala to Regional Research Institute of Homeoopathy, Dr. GGH Medical College Campus, Eluru Road, Gudivada for a period of one year. Nine bidders participated in the tender process and finally the following firms were approved by 3rd respondent by following the terms and conditions: