IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, N.K. CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Raj Wardhan Singh - Petitioner
Versus
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. & Ors. - Respondents
WPC No. 3777 of 2023
Decided On : 25-09-2023
NIT Conditions - Road Transportation - Clause 4, Clause 12 - The NIT for road transportation of bulk POL products was challenged by the petitioner on the grounds of arbitrary and discriminatory conditions prescribed in the NIT. The conditions challenged included the age of Tank Trucks, sub-ranking criteria, and the removal of the ST carry forward quota. The respondent, a Government of India Enterprise, defended the NIT conditions as valid and not prejudicial to any party. The Court found that the NIT conditions were not illegal, arbitrary, or irrational, and dismissed the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the conditions prescribed in the NIT for road transportation of bulk POL products, alleging arbitrariness and discrimination. The respondent, a Government of India Enterprise, defended the NIT conditions as valid and not prejudicial to any party.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the NIT conditions were not illegal, arbitrary, or irrational, and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the age of Tank Trucks, sub-ranking criteria, and the removal of the ST carry forward quota in the NIT for road transportation of bulk POL products.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the NIT conditions were within the purview of the respondent's authority and not subject to judicial scrutiny unless found to be wholly arbitrary, discriminatory, or actuated by malice. The Court emphasized the limited scope for interference in matters relating to tender/contract and the need for public interest and prudence in applying the principle of restraint.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed by the Court, upholding the validity of the NIT conditions for road transportation of bulk POL products.
ORDER :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/orders/direction declaring the impugned NITs (ANNEXURE P-1) issued by the Respondents to the extent of arbitrary conditions prescribed in the Notice Inviting Tender under clause 4) of the Special Terms and conditions Age of the Tank Trucks prescribing different Age of vehicle offered based on the location instead of prescribing the uniform age for all location, as arbitrary, illegal and irrational. Consequently, the same may kindly be struck down. Resultantly the respondent be directed to uniformly prescribe the age of Tank Trucks so as to ensure the maximum safety;
10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/orders/direction declaring the impugned NITS (ANNEXURE P-1) issued by the Respondents to the extent of declaring clause 12 under the Price Evaluation of the tenders which prescribes for further ranking in case the Tank Trucks offered are more than the requirement being arbitrary and as discriminatory, consequently, the same may kindly be struck down;
10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/orders/direction declaring the impugned NITS (ANNEXURE P-1) issued by the Respondents to the extent of restriction imposed under Pre-Qualification Criteria restricting the petitioner who has participated in the NIT on the booking slip by arbitrarily prescribing that the tenderers with booking slip TT will not be considered for arriving at Sub Ranking, as being arbitrary and discriminatory, consequently the same may kindly be struck down;
10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/orders/direction quashing the impugned corrigendum dated 21.07.2023 (ANNEXURE P 2) holding the same to be arbitrary and discriminatory;
10.6 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/orders/direction directing the Respondents to issue fresh NIT in accordance with law after amending/modifying the arbitrary and discriminatory conditions prescribed in the instant NIT;
10.7 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any other appropriate Writ, order or direction in furtherance of ensuring the rights of the petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant writ petition.”
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the conditions prescribed in the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for road transportation of bulk POL, Products: MS /HSD and branded fuels wherein under clause 4 of the special terms and conditions age of the Tank Trucks (for short, the TTs) has been prescribed, prescribing age of vehicle offered should not exceed 5 years for Mumbai Location / 7 years for NCR region/12 years for other locations, as on the due date/extended due date of tender. Whereas, for all locations it should be uniformly prescribed as 5 years to ensure the maximum safety. The object and rationale behind prescribing the age of TTs is to ensure safety, as such if the aforesaid condition is allowed to continue the very purpose and object of prescribing the age of TTs will be of no avail. Even otherwise, prescribing the different age of TTs based on the location is itself arbitrary. Further challenge is also to clause 12 under the price evaluation of the tenders which prescribes for further ranking in case the TTs offered are more than the requirement as under :-
1. Num
Reliance Telecom Ltd. and another v. Union of India and another
Global Energy Ltd. v. Adani Exports Ltd.
Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. v. State of Karnataka
Jagdish Mandal v. State of Orissa
Tejas Constructions & Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Municipal Council, Sendhwa
Point of Law : The author of the document is the best person to understand and appreciate its requirement, further observing that it is possible that the owner or employer of the project may give an ....
The court upheld the tender process by ONGC, affirming that the draw of lots method is reasonable and aimed at addressing local unemployment, thus not violating constitutional rights.
: Tenderer has no right to bank upon tender when life of tender was over.
Judicial review of tender criteria is limited to instances of proven arbitrariness or discrimination; valid justifications for increased financial thresholds can be upheld to promote efficiency and e....
Point of law: powers of judicial review are limited and while exercising such power the Court has to see whether the process adopted or decision made by the authority is malafideor is intended to fav....
The court upheld the validity of the tendering authority's criteria, emphasizing that terms are not subject to judicial review unless proven arbitrary or unreasonable.
The imposition of ownership requirements for RMC/Bitumen Plants in tender processes must ensure fair competition and cannot be arbitrary or discriminatory.
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.