IMPORTANT POINT
The interpretation of tender documents grants the issuer discretion to reject additional requests not explicitly provided for in the tender terms.

JUDGMENT :

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

As both the writ appeals arise out of the same set of facts and between the same parties, they are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.

2. Heard Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri S.V.S.S. Siva Ram, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in both writ appeals and Sri P. Kamalakar, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent in both writ appeals.

3. The appellant, which is an Oil Marketing Company, for the purpose of transport of its petroleum products, had issued a tender, dated 22.05.2023, calling for bids from tank truck owners, for road transportation of bulk petroleum products with effect from 01.08.2023, for a period of two years, with an option for extension up to one year. The tender was issued for employing 61 tank trucks.

4. The 1st respondent, which is registered under the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Act, 2006, had offered six tank trucks in his bid. However, the 1st respondent received a letter of acceptance dated 08.09.2023 for only one tank truck and a work order was also issued on 05.10.2023.

5. Subsequently, the 1st respondent came to know that one of the successful bidders, who had been allotted one tank truck, could not produce the necessary tank truck and the letter of acceptance and work order given to the said bidder, were withdrawn. The 1st respondent had then made a representation, dated 26.10.2023, for supplying the tank truck, in the place of the said bidder whose letter of acceptance and work order had been withdrawn. As this representation was not being considered, the 1st respondent filed W.P.No.31150 of 2023 before this Court and an interim direction, dated 01.12.2023, was issued to the appellant to consider the representation of the 1st respondent as per the existing guidelines/tender conditions, within a period of two weeks. In pursuance of these directions, the appellant considered the representation, dated 26.10.2023, and rejected the same. Aggrieved by this rejection, the 1st respondent filed W.P.No.1268 of 2024, which came to be disposed of, by an order, dated 23.04.2024, by a learned Single Judge of this Court, setting aside the order of rejection dated 26.12.2023 with a direction to the appellant to reconsider the request of the 1st respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

6. The appellant, after receipt of this order, had rejected the representation again, by way of an order, dated 22.05.2024. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the respondent again approached this Court by way of W.P.No.14748 of 2024. In this writ petition, a learned Single Judge of this Court, by way of an interlocutory order, dated 12.07.2024, had directed the appellant to award the contract of the tank trucks to the 1st respondent in view of the cancelled letter of acceptance by the appellant, pending disposal of the writ petition.

7. Aggrieved by the order, dated 23.04.2024, in W.P.No.1268 of 2024, the appellant moved W.A.No.681 of 2024 before this Court. Similarly, W.A.No.680 of 2024 was moved against the interlocutory order dated 12.07.2024 in W.P.No.14748 of 2024.

8. The case of the 1st respondent/writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.1268 of 2024, was that once a work order for a tank truck has been withdrawn, the appellant corporation has the power and authority to modify the tender and fill up the gap by calling upon the qualified bidders, who are ranked next in line to supply tank trucks. The 1st respondent also contended that such a course of action would not prejudice anybody and would only result in savings for the appellant corporation.

9. The appellant corporation contended that the shortfall created by the withdrawal of any of the tenderers, from a finalized contract, cannot be given to other tenderers in the said tender. It is also submitted that there is no provision in the tender for issuance of additional letter of acceptance as contended by the