IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ARINDAM MUKHEREJEE, J.
Sonarpur Progotir Pathe & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.A 4598 of 2021
Decided On : 26-03-2021
Evaluation process – Sought for cancellation of a letter – Held, Hon’ble Supreme Court has after considering several authorities, holding field of judicial review in case of awarding of Government largesse has concurred with views expressed in various judgments considered therein as regards parameters laid down for judicial review in respect of awarding government contract through tender process – Even in very recent judgment reported ratio laid down in earlier judgments have not been departed from Controversy sought to be raised by petitioners tested on touchstone of parameters of judicial review laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court persuades this Court to hold that judicial review is not warranted in case at hand – Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.) :
1. The petitioner no.1, a registered society as claimed and the petitioner no.2 its President have, inter alia, sought for cancellation of a letter dated 2nd February, 2021 issued by the Chief Medical Officer Health, Murshidabad (respondent no.3) to respondent no.5 (Anjana Ghosh Memorial Social Welfare Trust) informing the said respondent to have been selected as the lowest bidder on the ground that the bid of the respondent no.5 was mandatorily required to be rejected.
Facts of the Case :
1. The Chief Medical Officer of Health, Berhampore, Murshidabad, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal had published a notice inviting e-Tender inviting offers from eligible bidders for establishment of Waiting Hut for Pregnant Women at Teghari BPHC, Mahesail BPHC, Saktipur BPHC & Beniagram PHC (Farakka) in Murshidabad district of the State for 3 years from the date of award of the contract (hereinafter referred to as said NIT).
2. The bids for the said NIT were required to be submitted in three parts ‘Bid – A’, ‘Bid – B’ and ‘Bid – C’. ‘Bid – A’ and ‘Bid – B’ constitute the technical bid and ‘Bid – C’ is the Bill of Quality (in short BOQ) being the Financial Bid.
3. Under the evaluation process, the technical bid being ‘Bid-A’ and ‘Bid-B’ were to be evaluated first. Those bidders who qualified in respect of evaluation of essential and other requirements of ‘Bid – A’ and ‘Bid-B’ and their supporting documents being in conformity were entitled to have their Financial Bid (‘Bid-C’) opened and evaluated.
4. The detailed list of documents to be attached to the Bid was mentioned in the check list at the end of the bid documents of the NIT.
5. The NIT also provided certain guidelines for the evaluation process which are as follows:-
b) Each scanned documents should have an index page indicating the name of the documents enclosed with page no.
c) The EMD of unsuccessful Tenderers shall be returned as promptly as possible upon the successful Tenderer’s furnishing of the Performance Security pursuant to Instructions to Tenderers.
d) In case extension required, Bank Guarantees are to be renewed prior to 30 days of their expiry.”.
6. The NIT also provided for following under eligibility criteria:-
4. The Selection committee, at its own discretion, will evaluate the performance of Self Help Groups to be qualified.”.
7. The selection process as mentioned under the NIT is as follows:-
1. Selection process would involve short-listing of applicants based on eligibility criteria. It may be mentioned here that an Organization may be considered for operation and management of more than one Waiting Hut, if selected. However, the Organizations need to make separate applications for each of the Waiting Huts.
2. After short-listing of applicants as mentioned above, final selection of the Organization from the short-listed applicants would be made on the lowest offer made by an applicant for financial grant in the application for Operation and Management of the Waiting Hut through PPP on Monthly basis.
3. The Selection Committee can call for any further clarifications or information or documents at any point of time. The applicant may also be called for explaining or clarifying issues, if there be any.
4. The Selection Committee, at its own discretion, will evaluate the performance of Self Help Groups to be qualified.
5. Decision of the Selection Committee regarding selection of the Organization for operation and maintenance of the three Waiting Huts will be final.
6. Tender In
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. International Airport Authority of India and Others
B.S.N. Joshi & Sons Ltd. vs. Nair Coal Services Ltd. and Others
Jagdish Mandal vs. State of Orissa and Others with Laxman Sharma vs. State of Orissa and Others
Reliance Telecom Ltd. vs. Union of India and Anr.
Rashmi Metaliks Limited and Another vs. Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority and Others
Central Coal Field Limited And Another Vs. Sll – Sml (Joint Venture Consortium) And Others
Silppi Constructions Contractors Vs Union Of India And Another
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
The court upheld the principle of judicial restraint in administrative action and emphasized the need for the State to act within the bounds of reasonableness in tender matters.
The court upheld the award of the tender to the opposite party no.5, finding that the bid was qualified and awarded based on the evaluation of the bid and compliance with the conditions provided in C....
District Collector is not empowered to consider the aspect of alteration of any route or alignment except to remove difficulties faced by the licensee. As a result of this, even the request of altern....
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.