The main legal principle established is the authority of the Tendering Authority to waive non-essential tender conditions and the requirement for rational decision-making in such matters.

JUDGMENT :

S.G.Chapalgaonkar, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the parties at admission stage.

2. The petitioner approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby impugning the communication/notice dated 25.9.2023, by which petitioner alongwith two other lowest bidders were invited for negotiations by tendering authority i.e. Respondent no.4. However, during pendency of this petition, respondent no.3 passed further order dated 17/20.11.2023, disqualifying the petitioner, although he was already declared qualified and L-1 bidder. The petitioner has incorporated challenge to said communication by amending the writ petition.

3. The petitioner contends that, he is a reputed contractor and since year 2021 undertakes the work of water supply through Tankers under various contracts. Respondent No.3 - District Collector, Beed had floated E-Tender notice dated 13.7.2023 inviting bids for supply of water Tankers in District Beed. As per Schedule, the petitioner submitted his bid alongwith requisite documents. In all 8 bidders participated in Tender process. On Technical scrutiny all eight (8) participant were declared qualified. On opening of Financial Bids, the Petitioner was declared as lowest bidder being L-1. His bid was 43% below the estimated price quoted in E-tender notice. The petitioner, being lowest bidder, was expecting the work order. He submitted representation for execution of the agreement, however, to his surprise, he received a communication/notice dated 25.9.2023 by which 3 (two) lowest bidders including the petitioner were invited for negotiations in the office of Respondent No.3. Petitioner objected to such notice being contrary to the terms of Tender as well as the Government Circulars and Rule-book published by the Government. Petitioner has further pointed out that he has successfully supplied requisite number of the tankers in past and possess best experience. However, Respondent no.3 issued a communicated dated 17/20.11.2023 disqualifying the petitioner from E-Tender process giving reason that false information regarding ‘GST’ number was incorporated in the Tender submitted by the Petitioner. The petitioner responded to the aforesaid communication and pointed out that services of Water Supply under the contract issued by the Local Authority are exempted from the GST. Therefore, such condition of providing GST number is non-essential. Further, another bidders, who had not submitted GST number, was also declared qualified in the Tender process.

4. Respondent nos.3 filed affidavit-in-reply and justified disqualification of the petitioner. It is pointed out that in response to the complaint received from Mr. Subhash Bapmare, scrutiny of the Tender submitted by the Petitioner was made and it was noticed that the Petitioner has failed to submit GST clearance certificate issued by the Competent Authority for the year 2022-2023. The aforesaid fact has been confirmed from the office of Assistant State Tax Commissioner (Administration), Goods and Service Tax Office, Beed. The communication received from the said office makes it clear that on account of failure to submit the returns as per GST Act within the prescribed period, the GST registration of the petitioner has been canceled as per section 29(2)(c) of the GST Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was served to the petitioner as to why his tender should not be cancelled. The petitioner filed his response on 16.11.2023 and admitted that his GST registration has been cancelled. As such, he was non-compliant of tender condition no.11. Consequently, he was declared as disqualified.

5. Miss. Pradnya Talekar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that condition no.11 under Tender notice was not essential since services for the work under Tender are exempted from the GST. Respondent No.3 while processing the Technical bids did not insist for compliance of the aforesaid condition. She would point