IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH
A.S. Chandurkar, Anil L. Pansare, JJ.
M/s Reutech Mining, A Division of Reutech Pty.Ltd. Through M/s K.K. Alliance India Private Limited - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Coal A Wing, Dr.Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi and ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 6566 & 8247 of 2022
Decided On : 05-01-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226, 14 – Pre-Contract Integrity Pact – Section 8 – Mines Act, 1952 – Section 57 – Pact is subject to Indian Law – Power of Central Government to make regulations – State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal – Whether tender process should be taken further since prices quoted by bidders were more than estimated tender value by 54.08% but when compared with Last Purchase Price, quoted prices were 5% higher – Held, Court do not find that there is any case made out to exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India and grant relief to petitioners – Decision taken by WCL of scrapping tender process is not found to be either arbitrary, irrational, mala fide or with a view to favour any party – Neither is said decision vitiated by an apparent error of law nor does it result in manifest injustice – By observing that petitioners are free to invoke any other appropriate remedy as is available in law to seek such relief – Petition stand dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.
Cancellation of the tender process initiated by the Western Coalfields Limited has been challenged by two successful bidders. That challenge is being considered together and the writ petitions preferred by them seeking issuance of purchase orders are being decided by this common judgment.
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that on 17.11.2021, Western Coalfields Limited (for short, ‘WCL’) published a notice of Global Tender Enquiry for the Supply, Installation and Commissioning of Mine Slope Stability Monitoring Radar System with one year warranty and seven years Comprehensive Annual Maintenance Contract (CAMC). The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 6566 of 2022 – M/s Reutech Mining and the petitioner in Writ Petition No.8247 of 2022 – Sujyoti India alongwith M/s Hexagon Geosystems responded to the aforesaid Global Tender Enquiry. In terms of the tender notice each bidder was entered into a Pre-Contract Integrity Pact with the WCL. The technical bids submitted by the aforesaid three bidders were opened on 18.01.2022. On evaluation of the said technical bids on 12.03.2022, the technical bids of M/s Reutech Mining and Sujyoti India were found qualified. The technical bid of M/s Hexagon Geosystems was rejected as the bid did not meet the requisite criteria. The two successful bidders were informed that the price bids would be opened on 15.03.2022. Accordingly, the price bids were opened on the said date. After conducting reverse auction wherein the bidders quoted their revised rates, the WCL declared that M/s Reutech Mining was the lowest bidder for Item No.2 in the tender enquiry while Sujyoti India was the lowest bidder for Item Nos.1 and 3 in the tender enquiry. On instructions of the WCL said bidders submitted the requisite price break-up alongwith a detailed calculation sheet on 25.03.2022. The WCL on 07.04.2022 referred the tender process to two Independent External Monitors (for short, ‘IEMs’) and sought their opinion as to whether the tender process should be taken further since the prices quoted by the bidders were more than the estimated tender value by 54.08% but when compared with the Last Purchase Price, the quoted prices were 5% higher. On 15.04.2022 the IEMs opined that the WCL could take necessary action so as to take the tender process to its logical conclusion. It is the case of the petitioners that thereafter they were not provided with any information with regard to the tender process by the WCL. Sujyoti India made representations to the IEMs as further tender process was being delayed. Similarly, M/s Hexagon Geosystems having been declared ineligible at the evaluation of its technical bid also made representations to the IEMs. The WCL referred the matter again to the IEMs in the light of said representations. The IEMs held meetings on 26.09.2022 and 27.09.2022 and thereafter on 29.09.2022 submitted their report to the WCL. They opined that the tender in question be cancelled in view of defects in scrutiny of the techno-commercial bids. The Tender Committee of the WCL considered the report of the IEMs on 07.11.2022 and thereafter resolved to accept the report of the IEMs and scrap the tender process. It was decided to go in for a fresh tender process. On 12.11.2022 the petitioners received the requisite communication informing them of the cancellation of the tender process. After making a representation to the WCL in that regard, these writ petitions have been filed challenging the decision of the WCL to cancel the tender process.
3. Shri Vineet Kothari, learned Senior Advocate for M/s Reutech Mining after referring to various clauses in the Global Tender Enquiry as well as Purchase Manual published by Coal India Limited in Year-2020 submitted that the WCL was not justified in cancelling the tender process for procurement of Mine Slope Stability Radar on grounds that were foreign to t
Afcons Infrastructure Limited Versus Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Limited & Another
Agmatel India Private Limited Versus Resoursys Telecom & Others
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Versus AMR Dev Prabha
Harminder Singh Arora Versus Union of India & Others
Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Limited & Others Versus Vardan Linkers & Others
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi & Others Versus State of UP. & Others
Maa Binda Express Carrier & Another Versus North-East Frontier Railway & others
Municipal Corporation, Ujjain Versus BVG India Ltd.
Municipal Council Neemuch Versus Mahadeo Real Estate
Oriental Bank of Commerce Versus Sunder Lal Jain & Another
Padgilwar Agro Industries Versus Director &Ors
R.R. Verma & Others Versus Union of India & Others
Rajeev Suri Versus Delhi Development Authority
Ratnagiri Gas and Power Private Limited Versus RDS Projects Limited and Others
Sethi Auto Service Station & Another Versus Delhi Development Authority & Others
Silppi Constructions Contractors Versus Union of India
Sorath Builders Versus Shreejikrupa Buildcon Limited & Another
State of U.P. Versus Sudhir Kumar Singh
Sterling Computers Limited Versus M and N Publications Limited
Tata Cellular Versus Union of India
West Bengal Central School Service Commission & Others Versus Abdul Halim & Others
Court exercising powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India has jurisdiction to examine decision making process without even going into merits of such decision.
The cancellation of a tender process before technical evaluation does not confer vested rights to bidders, and adherence to procurement laws is mandatory in future processes.
The cancellation of a tender by an authority after the bidding process is complete is arbitrary unless supported by clear, substantiated justifications, reaffirming the need for transparency and fair....
The cancellation of tenders must be supported by concrete evidence to avoid arbitrariness, ensuring compliance with Article 14's principles of fairness and transparency.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.