The judgment emphasizes the importance of test reports in procurement processes and the consequences of submitting false documents, upholding the blacklisting but directing a redetermination of the period and its applicability to specific medicines.

JUDGMENT

Navin Chawla, J. - This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 21.02.2020 passed by the respondent no.2, blacklisting the petitioner from participating in all procurements of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC), New Delhi, for a period of two years from the date of issuance of the said order and further forfeiting the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) of the petitioner.

2. The respondent no.2 had floated an e-tender dated 23.11.2017 vide tender ID No.2017_NDMC_140709_1/2/3/4 for "Annual Purchase of Ayurvedic Medicines" for the year 2017-18. The last date of submission of tender was 18.12.2017.

3. Clause 15 of the terms and conditions of the Tender Notice required the tenderer to hand over two samples of the medicines against each items /medicine group quoted (A1, A2, B1, B2) along with the original/attested copy of the Test Reports issued from the Government approved /NABL Accredited testing laboratory of each item quoted.

4. The petitioner submitted its bid on 18.12.2017, which was the last date of submissions of the bids, along with the samples of the medicines and test reports issued by one Devansh Testing & Research Laboratory Pvt. Ltd.

5. The Technical Bid was opened by the respondents on 18.12.2017 itself, as scheduled.

6. It is the case of the respondents that while scrutinizing the documents in the technical bid and the analytical test reports submitted by various firms, test reports submitted by three firms namely, the petitioner herein, M/s Bhushan Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. and M/s ISPA Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., were found suspicious and thus, to verify their authenticity, the details of the submitted test reports were sent to the corresponding testing laboratories for verification. In response, M/s Devansh Testing & Research Laboratory confirmed that the reports submitted by the petitioner and M/s Bhushan Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. were not valid and were not issued by the said laboratory.

7. It is further asserted by the respondents that on receiving the said report from the laboratory, the matter was placed before the Annual Purchase Sub-Committee (APSC) (Ayurvedic), which after reviewing the facts, unanimously decided to reject the bid submitted by the petitioner. A proposal was also submitted to the Competent Authority for forfeiture of the EMD and the blacklisting of the petitioner.

8. The proposed action was confirmed by the Competent Authority of the respondents and by the letter dated 28.03.2018, the petitioner was blacklisted from participating in any procurement of Ayurvedic Medicines of NDMC and its EMD was also forfeited.

9. The petitioner challenged the above order before this Court by way of a Writ Petition, being WP(C) No.3336/2018 titled, Rhonpal Biotech Pvt. Ltd. vs. New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr., which was disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 09.04.2018, recording the statement of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents to the effect that as the said blacklisting order had been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same would be withdrawn, however, reserving the right of the respondents to take appropriate action against the petitioner by issuing a fresh Show Cause Notice and granting an opportunity to the petitioner to submit its explanation.

10. In compliance with the statement made, the respondents withdrew the letter dated 28.03.2018 by their communication dated 24.04.2018 and subsequently issued a Show Cause Notice dated 25.04.2018, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why action under Clause 18 of the Notice Inviting Tender be not taken against it.

11. In response to the Show Cause Notice, the petitioner, on 04.05.2018, attended the personal hearing through one Mr.Sunil Kumar Goel, Director of M/s Bhushan Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd., and submitted a written reply dated 09.05.2018 to the respondents.

12. The respondents upon considering the reply have passed the Impugned Order, blacklis