IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Hima Kohli, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.
Mining and Engineering Corporation - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 5612 of 2020 and CM Appl. 20342-43 of 2020
Decided On : 25-08-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of writ petition under article 226 (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. definitions of micro, small and medium enterprises (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. documentation requirements for tender submissions (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. eligibility for emd and tender fee exemptions (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. burden of proof regarding tender submissions (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. delay and the discretionary power of high court (Para 17 , 18) |
ORDER
HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider its technical bid for Tender No.BBNLIMM/PIA for BharatNet Project/Andaman & Nicobar/2020/004 issued on 18.05.2020, in the light of a Gazette Notification No.CG-DL-E-01 062020-219680 dated 01.06.2020 bearing S.O.1702(E), issued by the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and for a writ of mandamus, putting on hold the opening of the financial bid for the aforesaid tender till the petitioner's bid is considered in the light of the Gazette Notification dated 1.6.2020.
2. Shorn of details, the brief facts leading to the present petition are as follows:
a) The petitioner, a sole proprietorship firm which is owned by a private limited company under the name of Vindhya Industries Private Limited, is engaged in the business of execution of works contract in various States in the country.
b) The respondent No.2 issued a Notice Inviting Tenders (NIT) vide Tender No.BBNLIMM/PIA for BharatNet Project/Andaman & Nicobar/2020/004 issued on 18.05.2020, for selection Project Implementation Agency (PIA) for Bharat Project in the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar.
c) The petitioner states that the Notice Inviting Tender mentions that bidders (MSEs), who are registered with the appropriate authority, are exempted from payment of EMD and Tender Fee.
d) Initially, the last date and time for submission of the bids was 15:00 hrs, on 15.06.2020. The last date was extended periodically and vide letter dated 22.06.2020, the last date and time for submission of the bids was fixed at 15:00 hrs on 2.07.2020.
e) The petitioner states that the Government of India issued Gazette Notification No.CG-DL-E-01 062020-219680 dated 01.06.2020, which changed the gradation for classification of micro, small and medium enterprises and from 1.6.2020, the petitioner had become a MSE instead of being a MSME. Under the said Notification, for a Micro Enterprise, the investment in Plant and Machinery or Equipment does not exceed Rs.1 crore and turnover does not exceed Rs.5 crores; in case of a Small Enterprise, the investment in Plant and Machinery or Equipment does not exceed Rs.10 crores and turnover does not exceed Rs.50 crores and in case of a Medium Enterprise, the investment in Plant and Machinery or Equipment does not exceed Rs.50 crores and turnover does not exceed Rs.250 crores
f) The petitioner states that it was earlier an MSME, having investment in plant and machinery to the tune of Rs.5 crores but by virtue of the said Notification dated 1.06.2020, which came into effect from 01.07.2020, it became eligible to participate in the tender process as a MSE and therefore, was exempted from paying EMD and the Tender Fee.
g) The petitioner states that it was facing difficulty in submitting the tender documents online due to the delay in updation of the portal in compliance of the Gazette Notification dated 01.06.2020 (supra), issued by Government of India, but it was able to upload the documents on 2.07.2020, at about 2:30 pm. The petitioner also states that since the Notification is dated 1.06.2020, which came into effect with effect from 1.07.2020, it was not able to obtain the Certificate of registration from the Competent Authority.
h) The petitioner claims that its authorized representatives had gone to the office of the respondent No.2 to submit the offline tender documents in the drop box, but since the tender documents could n
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.